Category: networks

Back in the day when I thought Twitter was amazing…

Twitter bird logo in white against a blue splotch of paint. Photo from Pixabay

The blog post about Twitter from the amazing, generative and poetic Chris Lott is gone, but this snippet from 2017 remained in my draft blog posts. 

Ruminate » Blog Archive » Twitter Community of Practice

A paper presented here today analyzing a mobile social network application (kind like Twitter with groups, but only accessible from mobile devices) using “information ground” theory has me thinking about Twitter and the immensely important community of practice that it, like blogging, has allowed me to participate in I’m very curious if Twitter, an analogous system in multiple ways, will demonstrate the same characteristics regarding directed, non-directed, social revelation, witty banter, etc.

It’s still vague, but I have some ideas. One part would involve content coding… what “kinds” of Twitter posts are there that we can identify just by looking at them. A few off the top of my head (and a single Twit could invoke multiple categories… and some of these categories could likely be broken down further):

* link sharing
* social sharing (the classic twit)
* direct questions
* direct answers
* banter (generalized)
* banter (directed to in-group)

This was back in the day when I was deeply engaged with many people and networks on Twitter. It felt generative. In a discussion with a friend today, she said she never uses it anymore. I said I use it when I want to know about breaking news, particularly at the local level. But I never “read” it anymore. Partly because I’m less into social media consumption, and partly because the combination of polarized issues and siloed conversations seem counter productive.

Do you still use Twitter? How?

Image from Pixabay

Bev Wenger-Trayner Place, Pulse, Party

Beverly Wenger-Trayner’s old Eudaimonia blog post “What makes something a place?” is no longer online but in my archives of draft blog posts, this bit of text was saved. It seems to elegantly follow the words of Gardner Cambell in yesterday’s post, that I’m adding it into the slip stream. What do you think, Bev? Your description still resonates for me

Funny, I have been thinking about “place” related to another line of inquiry, and that is place as a recognizable border when I feel I am shifting between community and network. In my networks, I don’t feel the absence of place, but instead focus more on PULSE. In community, and even moreso in TEAM when I am intricately reliant on my partners, place becomes MUCH more central.

In communities of practices, I think I slip between place and pulse. Hm, I think I need to think about this concept some more and blog about it. After I do more housecleaning. (On a roll. Painting.)

Network. Resonance. Place. Pulse. There is something there….

Pen and ink doodle with lines, eyes, hearts, hands, flowers and words.

Gardner Campbell- network or resonance?

From the forest of forgotten blog post drafts, this one from Gardner Campbel still resonates for me. Gardner Writes » Postscript to symbolism and cognitive resonance

It occurs to me that the metaphor of “network” may be holding me (us?) back. I like to think about social networks, network effects, high-speed networks, and so forth. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that.) But the metaphor conveys a set of telegraphic connections, criss-crossing lines with nodes at the connection points, add-a-beads, point-to-point contacts and correspondences.

When I think about resonance, something else happens in my brain.

I think about resonance effects, about social resonance environments, about sympathetic vibrations and overtones and timbres and chords. I think about symbolism, and suggestion, about most resembling unlikenesses and most unlike resemblances (the way Milton described the relation of husband and wife in a successful–and happy–marriage). I think about complexity calling to complexity, about models that simultaneously simplify and amplify the power of the original as the models make the original more present, more resonant, to our minds.

As a lover of all things network, I too find myself wondering if I’m the hammer, looking for the proverbial nail. Resonance is a lovely option to add to my repertoire. The question is, what tool am I using for resonance? 🙂 I’ve leave that to your speculation.

Quick Edit: while draft cleaning, this one by Jim Benson “Liberate your Inner Hammer” on  form/function weaves into our speculation. 

 

Reflections of islands in Skagit Bay at high tide. Ika Island in the distance on the left, Goat Island on the right. Light clouds reflected in the water.

Dredging: Community 2.0 2018 – My Sketch Notes

Another draft post, dredged up, examined for relevance or humor. This one from 2018, the oldest draft in my queue.

Wow, this is an old draft. 2008, the Community 2.0 gathering in Las Vegas, Nevada. Some people blogged about it (Thanks, Victoria Axelrod!) in a more – ahem – timely manner! I did a talk on the history of online community, which I live sketched as I went. Trust me, I have not tried that again. My conclusions were pretty spot on, but relatively safe. Heh!

Community 2.0 – Las Vegas – a set on Flickr

My sketch notes. 12 + years later and a pandemic, what has changed? Patti Anklam’s stuff is still spot on and I wish she was still blogging. Tony Hseih is sadly gone but his approach to customer service still warms my heart. AmyJo Kim’s stuff continues to evolve from the base she shared that year. Shel Israel has stopped blogging and sadly I can’t find many recent traces of him.

My conclusion? Us old timers are getting old. 🙂

Hey Networks! Don't underestimate relationship

In strolling through the archives of unpublished blogs posts, I came upon one which was simply a link to a great blog post from the Interaction Institute in 2017. And boom, it is still resonant today.

Network members making sense of their own data…

The wonderful author, Curtis Ogden, offered 10 principles for thinking like a network. I want to pull out a few things in each one to share with folks in some projects I’m working on. So why not share it here too? This is dynamically incomplete… be forewarned!

The groups I have been and am working with are quite different in some ways. One is an internal organization. Another is a tripartite collaboration that is ready to grow into a network. A third is a group that has done amazing F2F training and capacity building and has had to regroup in a COVID-Virtual world. All three, however, are motivated to act their way into their purposes in new ways. So first is the mindset and practices. In a later blog post I want to explore snap-back, the falling back into our old ways of being and doing.

Curtis’ intro to the article is great context:

Over the past several years of supporting networks for social change, we at IISC have been constantly evolving our understanding of what is new and different when we call something a network, as opposed to a coalition, collaborative or alliance. On the surface, much can look the same, and one might also say that coalitions, collaboratives and alliances are simply different forms of networks. While this is true, it is also the case that not every collaborative form maximizes network effects, including small world reach, rapid dissemination, adaptability, resilience and system change. In this regard, experience shows that a big difference maker is when participants in a network (or an organization, for that matter) embrace new ways of seeing, thinking, and doing. 

https://interactioninstitute.org/thinking-like-a-network-2-0/

I think we all confound different forms of collaboration, try to be all things to all people and then we are frustrated when our ambitions are cut short. Working in new ways requires two things: discernment about what is possible, and a repertoire to make the possible real. I think these principles from Curtis support both these things. I encourage you to read the original article, because below I’m short cutting into some specifics.

Adaptability instead of control

This shows up so strongly in “strategic planning.” We tend to equate a detailed, task descriptive plan as a proxy for strategic action, especially in grand funded projects where plans, and executing on the plans, are key points for accountability. Yet, most work these days is in complex and changing contexts. Can we shift to adaptive planning which defines the purpose, direction and then iterates forward with strong accountability during, not just at the end?

Contribution before credentials

Equity has been in so many conversations. What seems to constantly block equity and its precursor, access, is that we continue to worship at the alter of credentialed expertise, rather than tapping all kinds of expertise. Whoops, look at the word “tapping!” We have extractive approaches to knowledge generation. How do we move to more contribution versus extraction that honors all, regardless of the title certain parts of society wish to attach to some and not others?

Giving first, not taking

See above about extractive mindsets!

Resilience and redundancy instead of rock-stardom

See above regarding stepping away from single views of expertise for the rock stardom stuff, but the resilience and redundancy needs a post of its own. The practice-based approach I’ve been working on for this is that we backfill for each other across departments, organizations, networks. No one these days can afford to hire all the skills they need at any one time. Trading labor across our networks builds redundancy and a sense of mutual support. There is a limit to this — we can’t keep ADDING work without taking something away.

Diversity and divergence rather than the usual suspects and forced agreement

This is why we work in networks!

 Intricacy and flow not bottlenecks and hoarding

I struggled with this one until I went back and read Curtis’ words on this one. The word that emerges for me is abundance. (In all senses of the word, including mindset.)

I’m running out of steam, so I’ll leave the last four for YOU to flesh out, annotate, expound upon. If I leave this as a draft for another year… well, you know what happens!

Self-organization and emergence rather than permission and the pursuit of perfection

Shift focus from core to the periphery

From working in isolation to working with others and/or out loud

 From “Who’s the Leader?” to “We’re the Leaders!”