Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| socnet_meeting_2025-09-21 [2025/09/21 17:01] – created sarah | socnet_meeting_2025-09-21 [2025/10/16 21:28] (current) – sarah | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ===== Social Networking WG Meeting 2025-06-07 ===== | + | ====== Social Networking WG Meeting 2025-09-21 ====== |
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
| ==== Meeting Notes ==== | ==== Meeting Notes ==== | ||
| - | Sarah & Ben d | + | Summary here of the meeting discussion and key ideas that we can move forward with. |
| + | **Principles** are that the platform should be (amongst other things): open, porous, hyper-local, | ||
| + | **Our working hypothesis** is that a locally-controlled / decentralised digital town hall can enable community connections and resilience while resisting corporate domination and centralisation. | ||
| - | Principles | + | **Identifying primary target users of the platform** is important because it enables us to identify, select and prioritise the use cases and personas to guide platform selection. Later it will guide outreach, creation of supporting resources and capabilities, |
| + | * Brunswick Tool Library | ||
| + | * Good Karma Network | ||
| + | * Muslim Women' | ||
| + | * Guerilla Gardening Naarm / Radicle Roots | ||
| + | * Balam Balam | ||
| + | * Library Services | ||
| + | Some activist groups (e.g. those that coordinate for protest) may have higher security needs which might not be our first priority (in balancing usability with security). | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Essentials for successful launch and uptake** include: | ||
| + | * onboarding plans, including advertising and outreach | ||
| + | * ability to sign-up using conventional email / mobile AND sign-up in a blackout | ||
| + | * pathways to find things: connect with familiar groups and interests, discovery | ||
| + | * first-time user experience and appearance high quality; entering a space that already has content, other users and familiar groups have a presence. | ||
| + | * account management capabilities for individuals and admin (password change and reset is possible; security is not overwhelming or obstacles) | ||
| + | * stewardship, | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Other challenges** to consider: | ||
| + | * visibility of critical announcements | ||
| + | * identifying and managing accounts to disseminate official announcements | ||
| + | * legalities such as age restrictions | ||
| + | * user privacy, management of user data per Australian Privacy Principles | ||
| + | * tendency towards lurking rather than active content creation | ||
| + | * what else? | ||
| + | |||
| + | **Tools and technologies** should be considered widely; social media is not necessarily the answer. Technologies people are familiar with, and which could have a role to play include: | ||
| + | * Email (but now highly dependent on centralised services from e.g. Gmail, Microsoft) | ||
| + | * Messaging (Signal, telegram, etc.) - addresses many of the use cases posed so far | ||
| + | * Bulletin boards (but appearance tends to be old fashioned - offputting? - and not natively federated | ||
| + | * Decentralised social media | ||
| + | |||
| + | Needs to be FOSS, standards-based, | ||
| - | ==== Level 3 Headline ==== | ||