I come so slowly to the point, where individual chapters of my new book in first out-formulated version halfway are present. At this â€śalpha versionâ€? still some must be changed, supplemented, painted and polished; but at the same time the time came to catch up first feedback in order to examine individual thoughts and arguments and if necessary still suggestions for illustrating examples to get supplementing studies or also linguistic improving.
I had yesterday made and today at two colleagues with the request for feedback had gemailt chapter 2, which contains a critical discussion of the concept â€śWeb of 2,0 â€ł, a sketch of substantial offer kinds and a summary of current empirical use data, finished in just as an alpha version. A spontaneous mood following, I set a short inquiry off also on Twitter:
Within a few minutes I had received two direct messages as well as a row from answers; in the long run I sent the excerpt seven further persons, who can give me feedback. And the beautiful: Although I know everything personally (although most rather removed) with the exception of a person, I would have never come on the thought to write her down with such please - now however I am glad over it because they will supply all valuable feedback to me with. A marvelous example of the new net in action!
While I am thereby, the essay piles to process (thus: to examine and decide which into the text it must, which should into a footnote and which can be omitted), me noticed that the book is listed with Amazon in the meantime (and concomitantly book in advancable). In the short description only this weblog is not mentioned, what makes me happy much, but also still another nice sentence contain, which refers to the forerunner book to weblogâ€¦
The last weeks was it here in the blog very calm - it was because of the fact that I had not worked as at all as well on the manuscript. At the beginning of of December 2008 colleagues and I have very at short notice the order for an expert's assessment received, at the beginning of the week were due, so that I was rather clamped beside the remaining everyday life business. Thematically there were no particularly large overlaps with the book, which has however the advantage that I have now correctly desire to come and the Papierstapel down work finally in front, which pile up themselves beside me in the shelves. Stupid way are also again relatively carved up the coming one and a half weeks, but in the second February half it looks then somewhat calmer.
A consequence of these circumstances: With sighted the term for filing of the manuscript to the publishing house (at the end of of February) it does not become anything; there at the end of March a further larger institute project (â€? young person and Web 2,0 â€ś) to be final must, it at the end of of April will become supposed. However we plan to keep e.g. the conclusion publication of the project complementary in certain way to my Monographie (in order does not double the general bases and findings to the Web 2,0 to note). I have thus a strong incentive, then for becoming also really rapidly finishedâ€¦.
I have past week with the Workshop â€śin the net of the servicesâ€? a lecture on â€śencyclopedias 21. Centuryâ€? held, in which I described Wikipedia and key word systems as innovative forms to collect and organize in the Internet knowledge. I had regenerated the relevant literature to day going systems with my student woman employee Julia property year already for the expert's assessment â€śtopic CAN in the Internetâ€?; for the lecture I could sight also some now at literature to the Wikipedia again, in order to then use it also for the book.
This covers on the one hand fundamental information for emergence and for the use of the Wikipedia, above all however three variants, as the dynamics of the kollaborativen production of an on-line encyclopedia are examined:
- Motivation-psychological work, which explains the cooperation to the Wikipedia from the individual motives of the authors; Schroer/Hertel have bspw. Factors determines, which affect the expenditure of time and the satisfaction with the own Enagegement, among them characteristics of the own tasks noticed among other things (acts one autonomously? Does own editing have a meaning for the entire work?) and the identification with the Wikipedia community.
- Network and/or item-related analyzes, how they are accomplished v.a. by Christian bar farmer; therefore participation can be explained particularly by the integration into a community of the engaged ones, thus from the connections, obligations and competencies, which takes place via growing into the circle of the â€śWikipedianerâ€?.
- Finally discourse-theoretical work examines, how articles in â€śthis-italic regimesâ€? are negotiated and how conflicts are decided on certain contents by mobilizing power resources; to it the work of Christian Pentzold, in addition, the lecture of Thomas Roessing belongs during the specialized group conference to politics 2,0 in Ilmenau.
Are there still variants, which I did not consider?
With the work on the chapter to the practice-theoretical bases for my analyzes I am encountered one point, which makes to create me for the moment some more, because it affects in the long run also my distinction of the action components of the identity, relationship and information management.
Starting point is the consideration that practices represent repetitive action patterns; these action patterns can be differently `well-founded however': On the one hand it can concern repetitions of actions, which at least at the beginning determined conscious reflections were the basis; the Routinisierung serves then straight not to have to make this reflection again and again works thus exculpatory and complexity-reducing. On the other hand it can concern repetitions of actions, which were never really reflected, but rather correspond to from the beginning unconsciously expenditure-practiced doing (with Bourdieu would be `results' of the Habitus).
In this connection I find the thoughts of Bongaerts1, which differentiates helpful between routines and habits:
â€žIt can be noted easily that â€šroutine marks' obviously originally a consciously trained acting, while â€šhabits' are based after their meaning content also and straight on the appropriation of behaviors, which must not have gone through consciousness in the sense of a draft, a goal or a plan, thus also not the form propositionalen knowledge assume must.â€? (P. 256).
I used the term of the routine in combination with expectations so far for the marking of practices, in particular their regular character always gladly more kommunikativer opposite (whether now in form personalisierter or more generalized different). In the term (identity, relations, information) of the management it is also reminiscent that here did not determine `techniques' are used - necessarily in the sense of the immer-rational-Geplanten2 however at least in the sense of conscious arranging: Networking on XING, filling out a profile on work NT whom, the production of a video for YouTube, inserting [via] - left in a Blogeintrag would be such examples.
Which I ask myself now: One knows in identification -, Bez. - and Inf. -, In mentioned above the sense of pre or unconscious behaviors discover management of the interlaced publicnesses of the new net beside routines also habits? What for this could examples be?
- Bongaerts, Gregor (2007): Social practice and behavior - considerations to the Practice turn in Social Theory. In: Magazine for sociology, Jg. 36, No. 4, 2007. P. 246-260. [â†©]
- That is in view of action chains and subsequent effects, which become rapidly difficult-to-understand for particulars, also an illusory acceptance. [â†©]
October was so so full-packed said with lectures and conferences - more exactly: seven lectures in three and a half weeks - that I did not come really to write at the book further. But I collected a whole set of suggestions and ideas, which partly than references in my manuscript stehen1, partly still in a note book for transferring to already wait. Among them, apart from the considerations already gebloggten to network platforms, for example thoughts on the produsage concept of Axel Bruns are or to the political and economic effects of the new interlaced publicnesses; at all (obvious) the consideration, the term â€śpublicâ€? as generic term for the different partial publicnesses to use, in those journalistic, organizational and user-produced contents interlaced purchase take one on the other and flow together.
After some days of the recovery, mental collecting and processing more differently different things I changed over today to go through a first pile of the â€śstacked realizationâ€?; it supplies material for the third chapter, in which I outline the practice-theoretical analysis framework. This chapter will supplement interesting because I unite the connections already in the Web log developed, it however on the one hand around further thoughts from the sociological practice theory, on the other hand around a systematic discussion of the three action components identity, relationship and information management would like. Those emerge in the Web log of course, but evenly not yet particularly in detail. And finally I notice that in particular to the role of software code still some is to be writtenâ€¦
- Which leads among other things to the fact that the manuscript represents for the moment its own mixture from texts and memories for meâ€¦ [â†©]
Forwards, during and after the AdHoc group of â€śon-line Datingâ€? at the DGS congress I thought about how one could systematize the different variants of network platforms. From the belly I have profiles at the beginning of Dating platforms as a special case of network platforms understood, finally put on members there also and to communicate with other users. In both cases a challenge of the identity management consists to enter aspects of the own person to written and/or into the profile. This happens besides in both cases against the background leader maintenance â€śauthenticityâ€?, i.e. Fakes are valid in all rule as deviating behavior - even if it becomes tricky regarding the question, where idealizing the own person auffhĂ¶rt and where the Faken anfĂ¤ngt1.
The differences begin however already with the motives for use, which are present individually and collectively to AdĂ¤quanzregeln consolidate themselves (â€? to which a certain platform is particularly well suitable? â€?): With network platforms the relations care is the center of attention; the dominating motive is to keep the contact to friends and acquaintance and/or to find old acquaintance again. That does not exclude that humans attach over studiVZ or Facebook new contacts, but it is not the dominating motive for use and/or not the leading Erwartung.2. With on-line Dating it is against it the explained goal, new humans knows to learn - knowing (learn) outside of the Internet is here not a condition, but consequence of the relations management.
In order to support these different goals, also the software code is differently arranged: Differences express themselves on the one hand in the refinement of the necessary profile information - above all however in the kind, how is gone around with the attached social relations. For network platforms it is konstitutiv3 that the own contacts are made visible and navigatable. Visitors of my profile can thus see, which ranks other user I among my friends/contacts, and can their profile sides click. Facebook or XING offer the option to suppress the announcement of the friend list; one seems nevertheless to expect from a â€śnormalâ€? profile to that one can see the respective network.
For users of Dating platforms such functions would be high-grade problematic and conflict-laden against it - users with many confirmed â€ścontactsâ€? (potenzielle or realized DATEs) came probably rapidly into the call, promisk, to be desperately or both; something similar is probably valid, if it became recognizable that one maintains parallel several interactions. The relations network is not made visible therefore for the profile visitor on a Dating platform; perceptibly the kommunikative dyad is only, and these also only for the persons involved.
One could differentiate now appropriate platforms along the two characteristics â€śpredominating motive for useâ€? and â€śvisibility from Ego networksâ€?; by simple cross scheduling I come on the following variants:
The distinction of boyd/Ellison network platforms would be following then â€śsocial network of sitesâ€?, contact contacts would be â€śsocial networking sitesâ€?. But which one could select as generic term for these applications? On-line Communities is often used at present, enclosure m.E in addition, forums or the like. And for the field â€ścare of existing relations - network visiblyâ€? does not occur to me for the moment no example. Is there one there?
- Ellison/Heino/Gibbs sat down apart thereby in an JCMC essay. [â†©]
- boyd/Ellison select therefore also consciously the designation â€śsocial NETWORK siteâ€? and not â€śsocial networkING siteâ€?. [â†©]
- With boyd/Ellison it is put on e.g. also in the definition [â†©]
[Like the life plays in such a way: Beginning of past week gave my three years old up notebook the spirit, why I the past days above all thereby zubrachte, a new computer for my work needs to adapt and the old data to secure and/or transmit. So slowly everything runs again, and I can turn to other things.]
In one of the first chapters of the book I will argue with the term â€śWeb 2,0 â€ł and different alternative and/or complementary concepts like â€śSocial softwareâ€?, â€śSocial Webâ€? or â€śSocial Mediaâ€?. The cryptotext for Web 2,0 is certainly Tim O' Reillys essay â€śWhat is Web 2,0â€? from 2005, which describes different principles and characteristics of the new net and of older characteristics and defines uses. When gathering different other texts and definitions I regarded also times the German-language Wikipedia article to look in particular in order when and how the first draft looked. Here screen SHOT of the all first â€śStubâ€?, which was set on 12.10.2005 (about two weeks after publication of the O' Reilly essay); with certain truth it means there: â€śWeb 2,0 should be the future of the World Wide Web.â€?
Only a half hour later had been revision-needily marked the article of another user than.
Nearly three years and over 1.000 changes the article looks later in such a way:
The largest difficulty during the writing of a book is my judgment, the network of connected thoughts, texts and realizations, which exist in the head and on paper to bring into a linear succession. In which order one treats its topics, and which argumentation steps has the own central theme, which will pull itself by the book? Where does one accommodate studies, essays, arguments, which affect different chapters of the intended arrangement? When actually are cross references meaningful on previous or following sections, where one repeats itself better simply again, in order to become fair certain thoughts?
Then with the Web log I noticed that it is for me a helpful and practical â€śVorĂĽbungâ€?, to sort my material first times physically in piles and these rather larger piles (to e.g. be knows the basic stick for a chapter or a Unterkapitel) during the actual writing again to go through, to rearrange, in sequence to process. For the first stand of a longer text this is usually enough, and into which further revision steps can I then polish, gaps fill, and other fine work make.
Tja, and accordingly looks it at present with me; here a candid photograph of some days ago, in still to some extent the unsorted conditionâ€¦
â€¦ and here the same picture today evening, with clearly more piles. On the right of down in the corner must be still sorted - those are to a large extent work to Social network Sites and/or network platforms. And are missing still the numerous books, which are located in the shelf beside meâ€¦
As it is right itself for a blog, as entrance a small personal history.
Already for a long time it was clear me that it is at the time to tackle a new book. The Web log I had finished at the beginning of of 2006; at the time I had already begun with the work in the DFG project â€śpractices on-line of the net workingâ€?, in which I me with blog and network platforms busy. I had thereby the opportunity to pursue the rapid development approximately around Social software/Web 2.0/Social Web [INSERT your cipher here] in an interesting double role as a participating scientific observer. Collected itself slowly, but reliably sea-honor much material on own empirical research, above all however relevant literature -, which I could process in lectures and essays, who almost cried in addition, thereafter, in a connected longer text to be discussed. Initially I still thought of an actualization and/or a new edition of the Web log, but soon it became clear me that the framework of this text me would probably not be sufficient; in addition it falls me unbelievably heavily, a once finished and/or â€śpolishedâ€? text to take again apart and convert.
The change from Bamberg to Hamburg to the Hans Bredow institute at the end of of 2007 provided on the one hand a whole set of new tasks and projects, on the other hand in addition, a work surrounding field, for me in which I can take a new book project in attack. After I pushed notes and arrangement ideas in the spring and summer always times again in my head (and in a Tiddly Wiki on my Desktop) back and forth, it was in August finally so far: I inquired Ruediger Steiner, the responsible lector with the UVK publishing house whether interest in a renewed co-operation would exist. In time one could say Just, because one was busy straight at the composition of the spring program there. I arranged a Expose and the draft of an arrangement, which in the conference of program one discussed and positively one took up. With the signing of an author-publisher contract it became thus official that I will work in the coming months on the fact that in the spring 2009 a book can appear on behalf of â€śthe new netâ€?.
Interestingly enough is one of the first official acts for the authors of a book still which can be written to write a short summary which is used in the announcements of the publishing house. Here thus in all shortness, for which it will go in the book (a version somewhat in more detail, which originates from the Expose mentioned above, is here):
The key word â€žWeb 2,0 â€śsummarizes different applications, practices and principles of Internet-based communication. Common it is to be published them that technical hurdles sink, in order texts, photos or videos, in addition, personal information in the Internet and to be maintained or attached social relations with other persons again. Optimistic voices stress the potentials for economics, politics and society, while sceptics before a fragmenting of publicnesses and giving up the privacy warn. The book discusses the current conditions of the research to on-line identity, relationship and information management with the help of a practice-theoretical analysis framework, in order to help to identify the actually new at â€žthe new net â€ś.
Now is the letter of a book already a time-consuming affair, why then still another weblog, which possibly takes valuable time up? Whereupon there are several answers.
The first answer is the fact that I could experience in the past years at the own body how the new net generally and weblog in the special one also changes the work of a scientist. And, for autumn 2007, â€śSchmidt with Deteâ€? offered the â€śBamblogâ€? to me and offer possibilities, my own thoughts and ideas with interested persons to divide. My work (and always times again also my spare time) was uncommonly enriched by the fact that I mean own personal public possessed. For a book, which concerns itself among other things with exactly this phenomenon, it is thus actually an inevitable step to be represented in Web log form also in the new net.
The second answer is that I do not know exactly yet at all for the moment, where this book-accompanying blog will develop. Possibly I present individual facts or arguments for discussion, possibly use I it here during the write process to swear in order over the letter to actually reflect (and), possibly use I it in addition, only after the publication of the book, in order to accompany the reception. A little will depend it probably also on the resonance, which I get in the coming weeks here: Which aspects of topic and writing of the book particularly interest THEM?