Lesley Anderson

Trust and Reputation - How is it achieved?

Analyse and comment on other aspects of online trust and reputation  that you feel are worth discussing across any TWO online communities. Consider how design for usability, sociability and sustainablity can help to foster trust and build a reputation among users especially the pragmatists, conservatives and skeptics.

Diego Gambetta

http://wiki.uni.lu/secan-lab/Trust+($28)Diego+Gambetta($29).html

 

Beginning as a closed network for American students, Facebook was perceived as safe by users who networked solely with friends. Opening Facebook up to the rest of the world brought issues that challenged user trust.

Seemingly from other users -

• phishing scams - WALL postings linking to urls mimicking Facebook accounts
• friend spam - people asking to be friends but really wanting you to sign up for other services

 Others from within the facility -

• text alerts sent to the wrong people
• linked advertisement systems - broadcasting user purchases made from affiliated sites on their WALL.
• Treatment of personal data such as   
  • inexplicable loss or disappearance
  • inability to delete personal data from deactivated accounts

Discovering these glitches, I questioned participation and wondered why Facebook is still well trusted, was recently announced within Truste’s top 10 sites - www.truste.com and  a world user-base topping 300million in Sept.2009. 
Both usability and sociability are high on the reasons why. 
Facebook is easy to join and use, offering  ‘connection’ to others across the world.  It caters for  fast moving lives, where computer use is ever present,  allowing frequent message posting and reciprocation to WALLS - rather than making contact less frequently by other methods.
Facebook has encountered problems, yet the privacy section covers them, stating age limits and user rights and responsibilities - how many people actually read the fine print? 
There is also a page at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=555062239&ref=name#/facebook?ref=pf   dealing with  current software or user problems and there is no fear of media releases  such as
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90781/90877/6742651.html  reporting on Canadian legislation set to change how all personal data will be dealt with on the site.
Acceptance by sites like Truste build Facebook’s reputation and credibility in user eyes, showing that they are working on problems adds to perception of expertise and honesty - “we aren’t perfect but we are doing something about it”.  Users also perceive that the majority of experiences are positive and decide to ‘follow’ - taking risks with the site, which they might not have taken otherwise and add constantly to the overall level of trust in the site. Read the rest of this entry »

Wiki and Moodle design

Using your CSU Interact wiki or other wiki experience and your
short experience as a Moodle member, answer the following:

c. Is the presence of likeable features also a combination of the design tips for
usability, sociability and sustainability, as advocated by Preece and Kim in earlier topics?

c. The presence of likeable features in Moodle and Wiki software are inextricably combined with the design tips for usability, sociability and sustainability  outlined by Preece and Kim.
If a user is faced with complications or problems accessing a social network, if the navigation is cumbersome or information hidden under layers they will more than likely not use it or certainly be deterred from doing so.  It is not unusual to hear from users that they don’t “like” a particular piece of software or a social networking site because their experiences have been difficult either with installation or attempts at use. Personally, I am a user who needs to see a purpose in something before I begin to use it or investigate it further.  For example, I am new to Facebook and Second Life (amongst a lot of other social networking sites) since beginning this course. I am able to see a purpose for using Facebook to connect with others in my selective personal, community. I can see a purpose for it professionally - as an easily accessed and navigated discussion site or repository for ideas. Read the rest of this entry »

Wiki and Moodle design

Using your CSU Interact wiki or other wiki experience and
your short experience as a Moodle member, answer the following:

b. What features do wiki and Moodle have in common and what are the differences (eg a Wiki, Forum and blogtool is also groupware design feature inside a Moodle site) ?

Wiki and Moodle design

Using your CSU Interact wiki or other wiki experience and your short
experience as a Moodle member, answer the following:

a. What is it about the design of the wiki and Moodle that you liked or disliked?

a. I have often seen my daughter access homework documents or class notes from the school Moodle site, however, I haven’t had any previous experience using Moodle myself.
Logging in was new to me.  I spent about an hour touring the site after creating an account, verifying  my email address and signing in to the Moodle for 510/213. The account was easy to set up and along with the password from Ken I got into the site without a problem.

I liked what I saw and was impressed with the uncluttered layout of the Moodle interface - to me, that reflects the professional purpose of the site. I have to admit, I like some colour and personality, but I can make up for that on other sites that I visit. The interface reminded me of Blog sites I use or have used - central area and different tools around it with highlighted links to connect to other pages/areas of Moodle. Read the rest of this entry »

Design rules and your CSU Forum experience

 EMT 501 - was my first contact with a subject that was relatively unstructured.  We had basic guidelines, but could focus on any area we liked and present our work in any format we liked as an e-portfolio. We were given particular tasks to complete for inclusion in the portfolio but were encouraged to look in depth at a particular area where we felt a need to develop skills.

As students undertaking the course we had to make the effort to join the CSU forum initially - that was our responsibility. It didn’t just magically appear - we had to go looking for it and add it to our forum group. I know this gave me a sense of joining a group of like-minded people and helped me focus on the subject and processes I needed to undertake  it successfully.

My experience with the online forum for this subject was that we were a large, varied group driven by a common goal -  understanding of the task/s at hand and subject completion. This helped us support each other particularly during the times leading up to assessment submission and completion. We often pooled ideas or called on a member’s skills in particular areas of ICT to help with tasks. Read the rest of this entry »

Using Facebook - Wednesday 9/09/09

 

Working together to get things done!

Ken sent an email on Tuesday 8/09/09 which included an invitation to join the ITC 510/ITC 213 Facebook site in preparation for an online collaboration with the group on Wednesday.  Unfortunately I was unable to get the links etc to work for me, so I was unable to join the group. 

For one of our earlier topics, there was mention of a 510/213 Facebook page and I had gone searching for it.  Unable to find it - it is fairly well hidden apparently, I created a page that was accessible to the group and used the picture here as our ID.

I am only new to Facebook, so I’m still getting my head around it. My older children have been using it for ages and much prefer it to other online pages such as MySpace.  I think it is a great, personal, quick and easy way to keep in contact, either by instant messaging/chat or leaving messages on someone’s “wall”. Read the rest of this entry »

Compare and contrast the works of Ward Cunningham,
Adam Curry, Jenny Preece and David Winer in 500 words.
What has been their contribution to development of online communities?

  
Rheingold described virtual (online) community as
“…social relationship aggregation, facilitated by Internet-based technology, in which users communicate and build personal relationships.” (Rheingold, 1993)

Whether in construction, continuance, extension or understanding, Ward Cunningham, David Winer, Jennifer Preece and Adam Curry have made important contributions to development and use of online communities.

Cunningham began and continues work in software patterns and extreme programming. Best known, however, for creation of   ’wiki’, collaborative, online software, Cunningham’s first offering, “WikiWikiWeb” was installed at c2.com in 1995. With “Wiki” being Honolulu for “fast” Cunningham’s aim was to create web pages quickly editable by their users. Today, Cunningham is Chief Technical Officer with AboutUs (www.aboutus.org) an online wiki community for business contacts providing

“… introduction to sites in the areas you care about as well as a way to share your knowledge of those websites.” (AboutUs, 2009)

Unlike wikis, blog content is typically contributed by single users, yet their characteristic methods for sharing information and feedback among members has contributed much to online community development. David Winer is credited with creating and publishing the first blog site in 1997 - Scripting News - www.scripting.com  and described as “software developer, entrepreneur and writer” (Wikipedia, 2009), pioneering outliners, content  management systems, xml-RSD and RSS - Really Simple Syndication.

Involving enclosure tags within blogging software, RSS allowed “bloggers” to automatically syndicate information. Links received to information or audio visual updates in podcasting, enabled download of files for use offline. RSS has been described as -

“… most significant advance in the fundamental architecture of the web…” (O’Reilly, 2005). Read the rest of this entry »

Social Architects and Online Games

Investigate any 2, shortlisted online communities and become a member.
Use a table to describe the objectives, rules of engagement and unique features
of each and report your findings AFTER becoming a member.
Try to find out who is behind the organisation and management of each online community.
Are they true social architects?

Online Communities

Online Communities	http://www.bbc.co.uk/cbbc
	http://www.shufflebrain.com
Objective/s	...to enable children and their carers to interact with us and with each other in a safe and trusted environment. ....to empower them whilst strengthening our brands. ....provide the best BBC content, a showcase for user-generated material, and the right tools across all the core platforms and devices they use. .....make sure users have easy access to everything we do, whenever they want it, putting CBeebies and CBBC at the forefront of an on-demand future. .....set the expectations of the audience, and most importantly fulfil them.
	Creating games for social networking “....specializes in creating games and services that enrich your mind, engage your creativity, and connect you up socially. We believe that games are everywhere; games are powerful; games can be a force for good.” “.... creating interactive experiences that are compelling, intuitive and entertaining.” “We want you to have MORE FUN keeping up with your friends. Why just LOOK at photos, videos and status updates when you can PLAY brain-building puzzle games made from that content?” stimulation of the brain while sharing photos
Game/s and Activities	BAMZOOKi, Level Up, Message boards, My cBeebies. Mobile, Trailer maker, Get creative, Me and my movie, More.....
	Photograb, WordStream – in development
Rules of Engagement	CBBC is geared toward the 7-12yr old age group. Children can only use the site after registering, which basically requires a username, password and valid email address. The site has simple rules and children are encouraged to read them with their parents/guardians before moving into it. There are general copyright rules etc – to ensure that the site is not copied and that any artefacts contributed by students are their own. All this is written in language that the age group would understand – if guided by an adult. Online chatting is moderated – posts are checked before being put onto the site, so it is not real-time chat but this is an important issue with in this age group. Children are asked to “...make sure you ask your parent or guardian for permission before chatting with other children on our message boards and interactive areas.” There are broad guidelines for using the chat and interactives “Remember - never be rude in your messages or give out your full name, home address, school, email address or mobile/home phone number when you're chatting. If you are worried about something you have read on our site, please let us know.”
	Players are required to be a Facebook member and have a Facebook account to play/use this game. Rules of engagement are basically the rules of the game itself Players are given a circle of details to find in the main picture and 24 seconds to find the spot where those details are in the picture. The score varies – from 20 (perfect) and the lowest score I got was 3 (for being near to the right spot in a difficult game). Most scores are 20, 15(close to the mark), 10 (near to the mark). The player gains various rewards along the way – trivia snippets and awards for attaining levels. Once the game is over, players are rated against friends (from their Facebook list) and others who have played the game previously. Games are rated in difficulty green (easiest) through to red (hardest).
Unique Features	CBBC is affiliated with the British television channel of the same name and gathers a huge range of interactive games and activities to cater for kids aged between 7-12yrs of age. Chats are moderated; with all comments and posts handled by the moderators to ensure they are ok before being posted to the site. My CBBC is a feature to the new CBBC website. It allows the user to create their own "den" or room which the can furnish. It is also possible to create your own avatar. This new feature is heavily promoted on the CBBC Channel
	Games are integrated and linked into Facebook. Games are user created – anyone can create the game. The user can play the game, leave comments, invite others to join Some competition is present – as high scores of other users/friends are displayed on the screen.
Founders	BBC – UK Lois Walsh Simon Fuller Pete Waterman
	Amy Jo Kim Scott Kim
Social Architects?	Are the creators true ‘social architects’? It is difficult to “track down” the actual creators of CBBC – Children’s BBC. My guess is that there are many people involved in site design and implementation under the banner of the BBC – British Broadcasting Commission and the actual creators of the site are well hidden. It is a designed social space, however, which appears to meet its objectives and actually helps others to meet theirs too. It enables interaction through games, moderated chat, search, voting, news contributions, reviews, constant news updates and probably many other things I missed as it is a huge site. The site also contains resources for parents and teachers based around informing them and helping to keep their kids “safe” on the net as well as dealing with issues they may be confronted with in day to day life – such as bullying, family structure etc. In this way it does allow people to act on what matters to them.
	Where CBBC have all the community interaction happening on the pages of one site – with links to other sites that may be of interest, the Shufflebrain site – is only part of the online community. There is information and blogs regarding social networking attached to the Shufflebrain site but its game – Photograb - actually works as link to a much bigger community site – Facebook. Being able to play Photograb only through Facebook, means if one player chooses to play it, the game can automatically interact with any friends that person has within their Facebook community and touches a much wider range of people than having it “googled” or stumbled across on one site. The option to post notes about scores achieved etc. to the pages of Facebook friends would automatically stir up some competitiveness and challenge friends to outdo each other. It also gives people the opportunity to interact with others outside their immediate group of friends and widen their personal connections within the community. The game is marketed well too – not just “a game” but a game to “enrich and stimulate the mind”. Many people would be “hooked” by this line and be able to justify their use of it by this endorsement. Using Photograb does allow people to act on what matters to them – building self-confidence, sense of achievement, healthy/fun competition, reputation, not to mention mind stimulation and of course, broadening their online community in a time when it is deemed important to do so.

Social Architects and Online Games

Define what is meant by a Social Architect

“Where the architect designs physical space, the social architect designs social space….. the role of the social architect is to create service-orientated organisations, businesses, governments, and schools that meet their institutional objectives in a way that gives those involved space to act on what matters to them….
“The social architect’s task is to create the space for people to act on what matters to them.”

Peter Block  - the answer to how is yes - acting on what matters

http://www.getfrank.co.nz/leaders-as-social-architects/

The many faces of you.
Make a list of all your online identities.

Social Networking Sites & IDs.

Site	ID
Facebook	Lesley Anderson
MSN	Lesleyaa@hotmail.com
Skype	lesley.anderson.3
Delicious	lesleyando
Yahoo	lesleyando
SecondLife	Lesander Lexington
Blog	Lesley Anderson
Gmail	lesleyaa
Ning	Lesley Anderson
Flickr	lesleyando
Twitter	lesleyando
Diigo	lesleyando
Interact	lander18
SINA	landerson
Genforum	aussiemum
Edublogs	mrsando
Moo	LesleyA
ISP	andoshouse
Runescape	Lesander58

Using the following question from Jordan et al (2003):
Do you show multiple identities or are you consistent across all instances?

It is fairly obvious, as I peruse my list of online identities, that I am reasonably consistent with them. 95% of my online identities use a variation of my name. A few have been decided for me - such as Interact, SINA (our school network) and the recent Moo login but the majority are my own choice or taken from “suggestions” as I have established accounts at various online sites. I am definitely not good at selecting or devising pseudonyms so I suppose they wouldn’t be classed as very original, however they are easy to remember this way.

What does your “persistent identity” online say about you, and what shouldn’t it say?

Basically, I think my persistent identity says whatever I want it to say.  The way the internet is structured I can divulge as much or as little of myself  and my personal information as I wish. If required I could create a completely bogus persona and pass it off as me. Of course, that is fine if that persona begins and ends with the internet and makes no impact on life outside it.
Personally, although my persona names are similar, when I create an online identity at a site - usually because I have to in order to gain access to it or contribute in some way - I use minimal amounts of information and often the names are variants. I never use my work email or my personal email to create an account and I hope that gives me a certain amount of anonymity and protection, although I am not sure if anyone is certain of exactly how to do this.
I also find the type of information that I include is dependent upon whether my persona is to be included on a professional site or not. After reading for this subject,  I wonder if that has to do with the amount of perceived trust I have in any given site or community? Certainly, in the “face-to-face” world, as professionals, we have both a written and unwritten code of practice and mores that go with the job. Even though these don’t officially exist online - anyone could claim to be a professional - do we expect a certain code from others within a profession and does this change the way we perceive a site or community we may belong to?