You are reading a single comment by @Velocio and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@Velocio
Fundamentally forums are not social networks.
I've had an epiphany on this whilst struggling to understand why social networks (Google+ with their circles functionality for example) simply do not create the same kind of really strong communities that forums do.
And the first part of the epiphany went:
Social networks organise everything around you, your identity, your ego. Whereas forums organise everything around the shared interest.
Which is fine, simple so far... but why do some people click with social media such as Facebook and Twitter, and others find these really hard to use and prefer to use forums. Why do some not engage their ego, and simply choose to be part-anonymous in a mass but engaging in their interest?
The second part of the epiphany went:
Social networks are for extroverts. Whereas forums are for introverts.
Which isn't to say that extroverts aren't on forums, and introverts aren't on social networks. But after a while struggling with the question 'Why?' I stumbled upon a correlation between two questions.
Question 1: You go to a party for about 30 of your friends, it's a long night and there are lots of conversations and milling around which you partake in for the whole time. Do you come away feeling more energised, or more drained than when you arrived?
That is a question that encapsulates a reasonably standard definition of an introvert (who comes away drained and can only do these occasionally) and an extrovert (who comes away rejuvenated and wants to do it again soon).
Question 2: Which do you use most, out of your own preference, social networks such as Twitter, Facebook, etc, or forums such as LFGSS, [insert others depending on person being asked]?
Given that introverts and extroverts split 50/50 in the population (or as near, that it's irrelevant), you'd expect that the people who answered the second question for social networks would split 50/50 and the same for forums.
What happens though is some vast majority (let's say 80/20 for the hell of it) of those who use social networks out of preference, come out as extroverts.
And likewise, those who engage in forums... the majority come out as introverts.
I've watched forums collectively do Briggs-Meyers tests before, and have always been curious why the majority start with the letter 'I' for introvert. Especially on US forums, as the USA is considered to be the most extroverted nation on Earth with some 60% identifying themselves as extroverts (source: Susan Cain's book on introverts... Finland is the most introverted btw... and only 43% of those online engage in social networks, one of the lowest rates in Europe).
And this basically led me to understand one really strong social thing about why social networks haven't killed forums: Forums are the most resilient thing on the internet because the people who use them are not being catered to elsewhere... introverts are not catered for in a modern age in which you are expected to sell and market yourself online.
So to go back and answer your question: What's different about Microcosm given that social networking platforms (open-source or not) already offer some of the functionality I've described?
The very simple answer is: Microcosm isn't a social network.
Microcosm is aimed at introverts, those who use forums to engage with their interests. Those who don't want to put themselves at the epicentre, but instead want to put their hobby or interest first and for them just to be able to contribute in some very small part-anonymous way so that they get a lot back from only a little social investment.
Social networks do provide the raw functionality, but that they are a social network is why they cannot provide it in a way that eradicates forums.
An essence of what Microcosm is, is the functionality that social networks provided, in the form of a forum.
I should say, when spending a lot of time speaking to people, reading and investigating those questions... which I feel are fundamental... I also for a while paused on individualism vs collectivism, but it never really answered it and felt more of a political answer that couldn't be generalised. Whereas the extrovert vs introvert answer holds up quite well.
Yes, I've got the book in front of me. I've been using it this summer to shift the idea. Cheaper to do that in conversation and drafts on paper than to actually build anything.
Now we're at the point that the description of what it is hasn't changed for a while... it seems to have evolved as much as it could and has settled. So now it's worth building it (a lot of work), whilst still asking "Quit, pivot or persevere?" frequently.