Full Circle Associates

Barbara Steinberg posted a provocative link on the Online Facilitation list about US AG Alberto Gonzalez's speech about the dark sides of online community. Patrick picked up on it. He asks some good questions. Green Chameleon - The Dark Side of Community

So my question is this: if the potential of the technology, and the human drive towards community is so strong among truly evil people, and those who are alienated and lost, then why cannot large organisations leverage it for good? Yes, we have good examples, shining examples, but sometimes it feels like a terrible, slow struggle. Why do pornographers and suicides find this stuff so easy, and the rest of us do not?

First, I think this is a misapplication of the word community. I don't think it's that people who have the intent to take advantage of other people are particularly attracted to community for the community experience. They are using it for their personal goals. I think community action for what Patrick termed "evil" ends is far far rarer. Yes, we might point to examples of organizing by people who are planning acts of terrorism. That feels more like community. The participants have a shared goal. They are intentionally interdependent. Pedophiles trolling online communities are not. They are out for themselves. So where there is bait, so goes the predator - online or off.

Second, I think this is a larger issue than examples of generative vs. destructive use of online groups. It is about human nature which will use whatever technology we have to do what we always do. These things may be labeled good or bad, and the technology affords or amplifies those charactaristics. While we see the amplification of the bad stuff, particularly in the press, we don't hear much about the amplification of the good stuff. So I don't know what the balance is. I have a stronger sense of the perception that the bad news is far more visible.

At SXSW Craig Newmark talked about the fact that as more "good" people come online (and I'm avoiding the issues around the good/bad labels intentionally. It's Friday. My brain can't go there) it makes it less easy for the "bad" to win.

So maybe it is a process of getting to an equilibrium online that reflects the equilibrium offline. That leads me to the very faulty question, are "bad" users more early adopters than "good" users? Loaded. I know. Take it with a large grain of Friday salt.