MD Intellectual-Social group Coherence.

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Tue May 18 2004 - 00:58:44 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD "biological" crime"

    Dear forum,
    I wish to share this with you:

    Searching for the "Sweet Spot" in Group Effects
    In: Network-Centric Advocacy - Promoting the adaptation of advocacy and
    traditional grassroots organizing to the age of connectivity.

    Clay Shirky cranks out a nice overview on group dynamics and social software.
    "A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy." touches on both social sciences the group
    behavior of online communities. I really like Shirky's dive into W.R. Bion's
    book "Experiences in Groups." (Extra-bonus to use see pre-Internet literature
    providing value). There are a few points that make the article relevant to
    network-centric advocacy.

    First, it challenges the "build the self-organizing tools approach" with a
    rich history of self-organizing tools that eventually are destoryed by the
    lawless nature of the tools. (We should look at his guidelines to see if they
    apply)

    Second, the article stresses the importance of group membership and groups
    (somewhat anti-network-centric). "It's obvious that there are no groups without
    members. But what's less obvious is that there are no members without a group.
    Because what would you be a member of?"

    Third, the article has a "seed" quote. (one of those quotes that I know is
    important and worth exploring but I need to let it germinate for a period of
    time.)
    > "So there's this very complicated moment of a group coming together, where
    > enough individuals, for whatever reason, sort of agree that something
    > worthwhile is happening, and the decision they make at that moment is: This is good
    > and must be protected. And at that moment, even if it's subconscious, you
    > start getting group effects. And the effects that we've seen come up over and
    > over and over again in online communities. "
    >
    The quote sticks and is worth mullling over. I agree with it. Group dynamics
    do eventually take over. However, network-centric advocacy seeks the sweet
    spot of the "complicated moment". Acting while the momentum forms and
    disappearing before group effects outweigh the benefits of scale. I can think that flash
    mobs might fit the "sweet spot". If the mob stayed for more then a few minutes
    police, fire codes and permits, leaders and rules would need to quickly get
    involved. However, the gratification is complete and the crowd disappears
    before negative group effects kick in.

    Can the speed and shorter nature of network-centric advocacy campaign
    life-cycles negate much of his talk. What is we don't make the mistake and don't feel
    the need to organize a long term community? I can't resolve it so it is a
    "seed quote" I'll return to in the future.

    Mark: This quote reminded me of Barnaby Rudge by Charles Dickens. (I love the
    works of Dickens - he was aware of and observed many Human patterns of
    behaviour?) Dickens explores the nature of the crowd in Barnaby Rudge; there is a
    wonderfully horrible chapter in which a crowd storm a prison. Mass hysteria is a
    phrase which comes to mind. What ignites a crowd to action? Why does a crowd
    act as an ephemeral self organising entity?
    I don't know, but it can be experienced, and it seems to have a balance
    between social and Intellectual? The dominating level is important, which poses the
    possibility of coherence between the two?
    The above article suggests a point at which a crowd begin to value their
    activity. Of course, the word value is the key; "...this very complicated
    moment... ...the decision they make at that moment is: This is good and must be
    protected. And at that moment, even if it's subconscious, you start getting group
    effects."
    For MoQers, this is well explained by a patterned response to DQ. It is DQ
    which is doing the work. DQ intervenes when a degree of exceptional SQ-SQ has
    emerged from the total repertoire of static values. Everyone recognises this
    point as a unifying inclusive sense of value. Coherence. The sweet spot.

    I would recommend a look at this also:
    http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html

    All the best,
    Mark

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 18 2004 - 01:00:43 BST