Lesley Anderson

Meeting 6

Wow, I am actually quite blown away after tonight’s meeting. I really think RedPod outdid itself tonight. It has been a pretty long haul this semester for most of us. Personally I have found the constant input quite difficult - with two subjects at CSU, a family to cater to as well as work. I know I will never take on this workload again and I began to think that none of it would come together.

It looks like we have just abou achieved it after tonight, though.  This was our meeting to put together all our findings and make some recommendations to our CIO in our Podtask scenario. As we needed to be able to edit our work together we decided to meet in Etherpad so we could take advantage of the interactive pad we could use to write on together. Our meeting began at about 8.30 - had to be a little later because Liz is an hour and a half behind us. We chatted and worked and chatted and roused each other and worked some more and joked around a bit.  Our meeting ended just after 11.00pm and we had the major part of our document done. I was impressed with the way we collaborated on this document it was a great job. Not so good was Etherpad, we had quite a few issues with it dropping in and out which was a nuisance, but, as we were all determined to get this done - we worked around it.  I am hoping to get into Etherpad again tomorrow and do some tweaking so that our document is just about ready for another meeting tomorrow night to finish off.  An excellent, productive, meeting.

PS - Liz and I have both spent some time on Etherpad today and we have a great document nearly ready to be published.  Tonight we should zoom through to get it finished.

Meeting 1

As the date for our pod assignment was getting closer and we seemed to have little success facilitating meetings RedPod decided to meet on Friday 2/10/09 at about 8.30 pm using Skype as a meeting network.  We decided to use Skype as we had been chatting on it and found it a successful way to talk to each other. That time was chosen because one of our members - Liz Evans lives in Darwin N.T. and we needed to take into account the time difference.

The decision to meet was made by three of the pod members - myself, Liz and Melenna as we chatted on Skype the night before. We all felt we needed to make a start on our assessment and my thoughts were to try and get it up and running before my school holidays finished.

The pod has 2 other members - Ben, who was unavailable to attend and Shin for whom we had no contact details as this member didn’t appear to be using the forum and had not attended any previous attempts to meet.  We did post a message to the subject forum, just in case either of the other members were available.

During our meeting we did make some decisions about how we would address the assessment.
We decided to create a new blog purely for RedPod and use it to write our ideas and recommendations for the final assessment. This blog would become our group’s collaborative space and we would have all our research and information in one place.
We also decided to post reflections on the assessment, and logs of the meetings to our personal blogs.

We made these decisions knowing that other members of the pod needed to be informed and contacted - Liz volunteered to do this and I volunteered to create our new blog using WordPress.
http://redpod.wordpress.com

Our group also decided to take a social network each to begin researching in order to make a start on our assessment and meet again on Wednesday 7/10/09 at about 8.00pm for first discussions.
I created our blog and customised it a little to be suitable for the pod and I also created some categories to get us started.

Here we go…………

Social networks case study

Who is following who? Exmaine the blogs in your POD and
work out the map of Followers/Following relationship.

This Social Networking diagram shows the group of followers of the blogs belonging to RedPod.  It is colour coded according to the Pods all followers belong to.

Assign each person a letter in the same order as they appear in the dialogue as a, b, c .. etc.
For your chosen extract, draw the social network diagram and build the same matrix of 0 and 1’s as per figure 1. Descibe any patterns of people’s interactions that you discover.
If you were to repeat this analysis on another set of blogs from another POD,
would you find the same patterns?
Why or why not? [HINT - changes in context and process may be just some variables to consider]
Support you opinion with any of the reference provided or with others you find.    

The RedPod meeting that this dialogue was extracted from and from which the data was extracted was certainly full on.  In fact most of the meetings our Pod has held have been the same.  I did notice, as I looked over the dialogue that we talk about a lot of other things besides the task at hand but there seems to have been great discussion about what we have been doing, how we are doing it and what we have achieved.  This discussion was highly motivated too All members contributing at some stage, to the discussion, is reflected in the table above.  We all talked to each other at some stage of the conversation.  The diagram is fairly mundane as is the table.

One thing, these items don’t show is ‘how much’ each member of the group contributes to dialogue and conversation.  Perhaps a diagram with weighted edges as suggested by Hallinan[i] in the second of her lectures - “Networks” would better do that?    Weighting or colour coding edges could certainly aid in showing which members of the group were most actively engaged during discussion and interaction.

The type of dialogue is not reflected - agreement or disagreement, questioning or explanatory, or reveal relationships between group members. Tone certainly is not evident and that is difficult to gauge from text alone - unless it is obvious that someone is unhappy with what is going on in a discussion and expresses it adequately.

The way I have displayed my social networking diagram is not indicative of the direction of conversation either.  It basically makes the statement that at some stage during the conversation person A spoke to person B. Having the table in front of you helps a little - in this case we know that person B did speak to person A but we don’t know where in the conversation this occurred.

There are certainly factors that I believed influenced this and other of our Pod discussions.
The timing of our meeting - we had not yet started with our pod work and had had a few hiccups with how we would approach the work and workload in order to fulfil the requirements of the task set for us.
With a general feeling of urgency and need to complete work within a time frame it is much easier to get discussion happening and keep it on track.
Time zone differences - we had to make the most of the time when we were all able to get together to discuss things as one of our members is one and a half hours behind us. Not that it has caused any real problems, but I do think it makes us frugal with the time we have together.
The nature of the work - knowing that this is assessment material also helps to keep us efficient with our meeting times and stay relevant to the goal we are trying to achieve.
Size of the group - only four members discussing things over distance, makes the discussion much more productive and makes all the data look neat and tidy - there’s really not that much to handle.

If these restraints and pressures from outside the group were not there, if we had unlimited amounts of time to work together and get our task finished, if we had to communicate across a huge group of people over distance and were not all working toward a common goal,  things might well be different.  Kirshbaum[ii] talks about complex systems as being self organising - they adjust naturally to increase their efficiency and effectiveness, in response to so many stimuli from the environment around them as well as being affected by the nonlinear change that happens within them. It is amazing that all of it occurs without us even realising it.   

 [i] Hallinan, J 2005, Introduction to Complex Systems, <http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~comp4001/>, accessed 21 October 2006.

 [ii] Kirshbaum, D, 2002, Introduction to Complex Systems, <http://www.calresco.org/intro.htm>, accessed 21 October 2006.

I decided to actually take a look at a larger dialogue to compare with my original data. 
This table and the second Social Networking Diagram have been generated from dialogue from the group’s Etherpad discussion on the 5/8/09 and, even though there is only double the number of members in this discussion excerpt the picture is quite different - in both the table and the diagram. I remember feeling at the time, how disjointed the meeting felt as members of the group came in and left randomly.  The table also shows dominance by a couple of the group members and the dialogue actually reflects this - with their names coming up more often in the conversation.  It also shows polarising to a certain degree - this was quite early in our semester of work and people were still finding their way, getting to know others and understand how things would work.

Is social networking a business model?

What are the arguments for and against social networking being classified as a business model?

There is certainly a lot of talk on the web about business models and whether social networking sites could be classified as having one. Firstly, tracking down a definition of a business model that I could understand - as a non-business person was challenging. I finally got some satisfaction with this definition. A business model is -
“A description of the operations of a business including the components of the business, the functions of the business, and the revenues and expenses that the business generates. ” http://www.investorwords.com/629/business_model.html

It seems that a business model is generally about how a business will generate revenue to sustain itself and satisfy anyone who has financial interests in it - monetization. Some models and the problems they may face with regard to social networking follow in the table below. Read the rest of this entry »

Aggregation, syndication and the social engine

Explain how the Elgg social engine works on a Web site where it is installed?
Is this the type of application you want on your Web server in the workplace?

Elgg is built on LAMP[i] it is open source software, released under the GPL[ii].  Elgg has its own system of plug-ins and also supports RSS, OpenID, FOAF and XML-RPC for integration with most blogging sites.

Elgg provides each user with their own blog, file repository, online profile and RSS reader and their content can be tagged with keywords - connecting them to users with similar interests and giving the ability to create their own PLN(Personal Learning Network).  It is different to other blog facilities or commercial Social Networking sites such as Facebook in the amount of control users are given over who can access the content they publish. Each individual profile item, blog post or uploaded file can be assigned its own access restriction, ranging from being fully public to only readable by a selected user or group of users.

New Elgg users begin by creating an identity which says who they are and what they are interested in. Published items can be tagged and the software uses these tags to connect other users with similar interests. Read the rest of this entry »

Aggregation, syndication and the social engine

del.icio.us is a social bookmarking website.
What does this mean and what are the advantages for workgroups?
Discuss how del.icio.us uses the term ‘tag’ in a different context to what Web publishers would be familiar.

With billions of web-pages, it makes sense that we are able to pull out the best or most useful pages we require, with relative ease. We could bookmark into the browser of our computer but then the links are tied only to one computer - when we switch computers we don’t have access to our bookmarked sites. 

Social bookmarking sites - such as delicious have changed this. 

Delicious doesn’t use a browser but uses a website instead. A user signs up for a free account and adds a couple of buttons to the browser - a delicious symbol and a tag symbol.

The delicious symbol - is a link to www.delicious.com which takes the user to the main page of the site showing a list of the newest bookmarks available from users.

The tag symbol - is the button a user presses if they want to add a new bookmark to the website. Read the rest of this entry »

Data portability, FOAF and the Semantic Web

1.  Begin with the YouTube video at http://www.foaf-project.org/community

I found this video an interesting and novel way to get an IT based message across to an audience.  It does it though - reminding  the viewer  that for each social networking site you sign up to, you have to fill in the same data or information about yourself over and over again and how much easier life would be if you could just “get your date out” once.  One size to fit all, saving time and energy and letting you get on with the social side of social networking.

2. Like a chain letter, our data seems to move within and between
tools like Facebook and Twitter. Is this a good thing?

People’s web presence forms part of their identity so they should have the right to move their information wherever, whenever they wish.  It is understandable that a business - once you sign up with it - is going to do everything in its power to keep you tied to them. They may use the term ’service’ but ultimately they are businesses and like all other businesses need to make a profit to stay in business.  The number of people they have within their network has to be the clincher for the advertising attached to sites that ultimately makes them money.

Giving users flexibility to move, if they want to, from one network to another and take their data with them, could possibly be what spurs network creators to do better things with their sites and software - so that people won’t want to leave. In that way there are benefits to all parties. Sites keep their numbers and users keep their data and options to use it wherever they like.

I have to admit, I am over filling in the same information repetitively in order to access sites that offer social networking software and facilities but that is more to do with laziness than retention of my own identity or data. Read the rest of this entry »

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 »

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 »