Skip to main content

Home/ #Rhizo15/ Group items tagged web services

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Vanessa Vaile

Ethics and soft boundaries between Facebook groups  and other web services | ... - 0 views

francesbell.wordpress.com/...-groups-and-other-web-services

#PFR ethics facebook groups web services blog-post social media #rhizo14 group dynamics

shared by Vanessa Vaile on 17 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • exchange of information between open and closed spaces
  • Facebook groups can be open, closed or secret, the meanings of these being laid out in the Facebook help
  • the ‘closed’ space of Facebook, only visible to one of the 1.3 billion members of Facebook
  • ...36 more annotations...
  • Facebook is not completely open from the outside but doesn’t seem very closed
  • anyone who has the link to an open Facebook group post or comment, can share it inside or outside Facebook, and it can be opened by any Facebook (not just group) member.
  • participants who are not Facebook members are excluded from sight of posts in the Facebook group, whilst a very large number of Facebook members who have never heard of rhizo14 could check it out if you sent them the link
  • Ethical dilemmas
  • How do we behave around here?
  • The rhizo14 MOOC offers no explicit written norms, behavioural or otherwise, and the strapline for the FB group is “An attempt to create a feed for Rhizomatic Learning posts from around the web.”
  • a number of people (significantly less than the full 240 ish membership) regard the group as a semi-private backchannel
  • The implicit norms on lurking in the FB group are to some extent discernible, but the norms on other behaviours sometimes seem to be taken as read by some active members of the group.
  • Teachers and moderators can model ethical behaviour, and communities usually engage with norm-building online where misunderstanding is not uncommon. Overt moderation and norm-building activities have been generally absent from rhizo14 in general and the FB group in particular
  • What does sharing mean within and beyond the rhizo14 community?
  • A lot of sharing goes on at rhizo14, and there is a sense that openness is a value of rhizo14. The remix culture has been very evident in rhizo14, and creativity and remix
  • Communities of Practice literature and others have identified the importance of the boundary in the propagation of knowledge.  The facility for stuff and people to cross boundaries presents great opportunities, but with these come tricky questions of how we share and what we do with what is shared
  • A great set of ‘rules’ that has helped sharing is Creative Commons Licenses, not always enforceable but signifying intent in a sharing and use context
  • A dilemma presented by research data sharing is current at rhizo14 FB group, and raises, for me at any rate, some very interesting issues about how we do Open Research
  • the issue of ethics of use of open/closed data for research purposes in rhizo14 at the time it became clear that a group doing auto-ethnography, and a group of which I am a part were both doing research around rhizo14
  • The data arrangements
  • my wish not to be quoted was incompatible with the publicy of the document
  • Discussion of Agency
  • sharing our ethical stance with others can help our moral agency within a network of human and technical agents.  I am not thinking of a set of rules but rather our expectations and ethical stance that we could share with other moral agents
  • ome participants seem to assume there is a ‘common decency’ approach to the use of ‘open’ information
  • unwarranted assumption of community
  • technology as ‘moral agent’ where permissions and constraints on agency can be coded into a system
  • hard rules, hard boundaries can be explained in help pages and observed in action
  • rules can be overcome by human agency.
  • Some Tentative Conclusions
  • An important element of the digital moral agent’s backpack to complement their ethical literacy is the digital literacy of having an active understanding of the ethical and other implications of using a digital space/service for communication
  • benefits in clarifying use of information, utterances, multimedia in practice
  • the more open the use and sharing of information, the more important it is to clarify how we expect that information to be used
  • unclear use in the above extract from Help of the words
  • I would have benefited from a clearer statement of expectations and behaviours in rhizo14
  • discussion on how we behave around rhizo14
  • digital literacies are a moving target
  • communication in open spaces is tricky, we need flexible repair strategies
  • state our expectations and promote discussion of expectations within a group  as starting point, then we may be able to minimise but not eliminate problems
  • the issue of who can use the information in the auto-ethnography
  • “when you engage online in equally public settings such as on someone’s Facebook Wall, the conversation is public by default, private through effort.” (boyd, danah. 2010. “Making Sense of Privacy and Publicity.” SXSW. Austin, Texas, March 13).
  • Vanessa Vaile on 17 Jun 14
     
    "As part of a MOOC on rhizomatic learning that performs itself in many different spaces (Facebook, P2PU, G+, Twitter and others), I am a member of an 'open' Facebook group.  It is endlessly fascinating, and has given me a lot of scope for reflection about back channels and the exchange of information between open and closed spaces. Of course, I say that as if a space could be categorised as open or closed:  it's often a lot more complicated than that, acted out by technical aspects of the space and by the agency of the people who interact there. Facebook groups can be open, closed or secret, the meanings of these being laid out in the Facebook help."
  • Vanessa Vaile on 17 Jun 14
     
    "As part of a MOOC on rhizomatic learning that performs itself in many different spaces (Facebook, P2PU, G+, Twitter and others), I am a member of an 'open' Facebook group.  It is endlessly fascinating, and has given me a lot of scope for reflection about back channels and the exchange of information between open and closed spaces. Of course, I say that as if a space could be categorised as open or closed:  it's often a lot more complicated than that, acted out by technical aspects of the space and by the agency of the people who interact there. Facebook groups can be open, closed or secret, the meanings of these being laid out in the Facebook help."
Vanessa Vaile

Ethics and soft boundaries between Facebook groups  and other web services | ... - 0 views

francesbell.wordpress.com/...-groups-and-other-web-services

power ethics boundaries PFR #rhizo14

shared by Vanessa Vaile on 17 Jun 14 - No Cached
  • This is rhetoric, perhaps even rhizorhetoric, at it’s best
  • I want to frame my comments in the distinction between reductionist thought and complexity thought, a habit of mind I attribute to Edgar Morin’s book On Complexity
  • tension between a reductionist understanding of power and a complexity understanding
  • ...33 more annotations...
  • Steven Luke’s short article about power
  • I find the fourth view, the one from Foucault, to be the most engaging, as it approaches a complex view of power
  • first three views of power assume a Classical, simple (not simplistic, but not complex, either) epistemology
  • “‘Power’ in its most generic sense simply means the capacity to bring about significant effects: to effect changes or prevent them.”
  • The One-dimensional View posits two agents disjoined from one another, and power occurs when one agent prevails in some way over the other agent
  • too simple, too explicit and over
  • The Two-dimensional view adds agenda control by the more powerful agent, and finally, the Three-dimensional view adds social influence
  • it also encompasses being able to secure their dependence, deference, allegiance or compliance, even without needing to act and in the absence of conflict.
  • the successive views move in the direction of complexity, but they are always limited by a Classical epistemology that posits disjoined, discrete agents interacting in deterministic ways across or through clear boundaries, either in accordance with or in violation of some social contract or rules.
  • its affordances are outweighed by its limitations
  • This is where Foucault’s view of power comes into play, and note that it’s the only unnamed view
  • complexity is often nameless, even unnameable
  • power is the flow of energy, matter, information, and organization throughout a complex, multi-scale system
  • an agent is formed and informed by the flows of energy, information, and organizational structures of the systems within which the agent lives and functions
  • we are not discrete entities, independent of an enclosing ecosystem
  • those flows all implicate power
  • Power is the weave of the fabric we are all woven into, and it is difficult, often impossible, to isolate any single thread of power and to trace it back to a single cause.
  • what does this mean for how we should decide who is in Rhizo14 and how we should behave there?
  • the more open the use and sharing of information, the more important it is to clarify how we expect that information to be used
  • Clarity has great affordances, but it also has its blindness
  • This is a fine example of a clear, classical social contract. Independent agents agree on boundaries and behaviors between themselves
  • This assumes discrete agents with clear boundaries, a simple view of power and reality
  • A complex view of power and reality—my view—says, however, that Frances is already part of the Rhizo14 group and the document
  • Likewise, I suspect that Frances has herself been in/formed by the Rhizo14 discussion
  • circular causality, a core mechanism of complex systems with their complex flows of power
  • Power as flows of energy, information, and organization have already woven us together in ways that I do not know how to disentangle.
  • really only a very small part
  • request not to be part of the group leaves me with some sticky issues
  • most views of plagiarism are based on the simple view of relationships among agents and social contracts
  • ole authorship is a reductionist’s fiction, a useful fiction perhaps, but perhaps becoming less useful as online, open spaces emerge
  • How to behave in an open community, then, where flows of power are unavoidable and many are uncontrollable, even unknowable
  • if we don’t confront this problem, then we will continue to apply the old social contracts. I don’t think those social contracts alone can address the issue
  • interested in learning how this group will write this document. Like all good ethnographers, I think I can learn most by living and functioning within the group, by helping to write it. I want to define the process from the inside
1 - 2 of 2
Showing 20▼ items per page