A few More questions and thoughts on Our Friend Blanchard!! Week 4

Is the ‘virtual settlement’ a useful concept? Why?

Yes! I think it is a useful concept! I find it helpful in understanding and describing what basically is a group of people getting together discussing subjects of choice but with the slight difference of it being online! "Jones defines virtual settlements as the virtual place in which people interact'" (blanchard) therefore a pretty basic meaning has been attached to the term, however i think that the term 'virtual settlement' gives a better and deeper meaning. It draws in the users and their many differing ideas and opinions and allows them to express them in a particular place.

What do you think about the issue of whether or not all CMC (computer-mediated-communication) groups deserve the status of communities? What characteristics would you stress as important?

I think CMC groups do deserve the status of the communities, as who 's to define in this day and age what a community really is. Wikipedia defines community as
"a group of interacting organisms sharing an environment."
Therefore this is exactly what people are doing even if it is online! Another relevant point it makes is that "In human communities,intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness." This is both true and an essential aspect of CMC's.

This question also brings in McMillan and Chavis argument of SOC (sense of community) i think that in both real-life communities and the virtual there is a need and a want of membership and sense of belonging. There is certainly feelings of influence present in both real- life and within these CMC groups, perhaps more so online. The whole point in communities is that they integate and support and work together, often similar actions of support can be found on CMC groups. And finally a community is a community because their is a sense of shared emotional connection between the inhabits within it, this is definitely present in many forums i have read, where i have read how people read, write and comment on each others hobbies, beliefs or even trouble they might have had.

‘Lurkers’ – who needs them? Should they be booted out or should we embrace people’s differences (some people are readers more than producer/writers?). Can’t there be different roles for the members of a community?

This is a tough question as i think the term given to them, LURKERS, already has a negative tone to it!! Unfortunately these people may actually be just 'different' or interested or even intrigued but simply shy. Especially in today's world, people are edgy and suspicious of others, in particular the internet has caused quite a stir in relation to the unknown factor and the worry of identity!
And due to this my my initial response is, well Yes they shouldn't be in MOO's if their not going to participate. Depending on the chosen subject, if its something simple and not particularly controversial, for example a conversation on how best to put on eye makeup, then fine!! But if its a contestable debate showing strong personal views and even some personal information then i don't think people should be allowed to watch and read all and take it all in.

Am not sure about the idea of different roles, everyone is equal when it comes to online discussion, no one in particular can or should take charge. However it is pretty much up to yourself how interactive and how much of a participant you want to be within these.

Blogs as Virtual Communities: Identifying a Sense of Community by Anita Blanchard Week 4

VITAL POINTS I THINK HELP TO BRING FURTHER MEANING TO VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES & OF COURSE MY THOUGHTS!! http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/blogs_as_virtual.html

Virtual community is a term used to refer to vastly different computer-mediated communication (CMC) groups, such as EBay or a soap opera newsgroup.

The importance of virtual communities for social reasons!
The idea that virtual communties open up and expand a persons village ( or surroundings) to the whole world! I think perhaps this argument provides a bases for the advantages of using these websites. As people can expand their learning and have the chance to reach out, in which may not be possible in the real world, due to issues such as finances.

Virtual communities can increase involvement within people’s face-to-face communities by increasing democratic participation and other community activism. Suggesting that these virtual communities of people provide a source of power, or force in active day to day activitives.

The idea that the use of the world 'community' has a emotionally postitive effect on people which encourages people to get involved. I think that perhaps people who are bored, lonely, looking for someone different to chat to, or simply interested in a particular topic of discussion would enjoy getting involved in these 'communities' as perhaps it gives people a sense of worth (as far expressing their opion an being agreed with) and the sense of being 'part of something' !

Jones argues that we can understand virtual communities by understanding the artifacts of its virtual settlement: its postings, structure and content.

Sense of Community!

Feelings of membership: Feelings of belonging to, and identifying with, the community;
Feelings of influence: Feelings of having influence on, and being influenced by, the community;
Integration and fulfillment of needs: Feelings of being supported by others in the community while also supporting them; and
Shared emotional connection: Feelings of relationships, shared history, and a “spirit” of community. McMillan and Chavis (1986)


The question of whether blogs (like mine) can be described as a Virtual community!
The fact that my blog contains as an author (ME), contains regular post dates, and is based around the particular topic of New Media, means that it can be classed as a virtual community, as it attract interactive attention from a minimal number of participants.