Clay Shirky on social software

[David]

Shaun wrote:
> When people seek out 
> the posters they enjoy reading using the search engines, over time, 
it 
> seems to me you can end up with very cliquish behaviour on the 
list. 
> Where certain cores of people are discussing things among 
themselves, 
> and a large group of people circle around listening, but are never 
heard 
> because they're not on peoples lists of worthwhile posters - and 
never will 
> be because those people are not reading what they have to say.

That is a risk.  The way it is mitigated for me is that I read up and 
down the threads of posts, so new people catch my eye that way.  
Ultimately it's the attitude that goes with the list-reading strategy 
that counts.

However, I think the bottom line of the original article was that 
cliques are inevitable and attempts to thwart them are 
counterproductive.   The trick is to try to limit their damaging 
effects.

What I think would do wonders for list morale, but doesn't exist in 
Yahoo, is for an automatic record to be kept when someone reads your 
post.  That way, you can see if people are reading your posts without 
forcing them to massively bump up list volume or expecting them to 
engage you offlist.

Comprehensive and well-reasoned posts (as Shaun's usually are) go 
unanswered because, well, there is nothing more to say, whereas "Hey, 
I hope my Harry and Ginny get together shes what he needs LOL" is 
guaranteed a response.

Annemehr expressed concern that it is too early to start tinkering 
with the list structure.

Absolutely.  This is blue skies thinking about the future, not a 
proposal for action now.

I do think it does us good to have our collective thinking 
stimulated, and Dumbledad's link was excellent for that.

David