User Tools

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
socnet_meeting_2025-09-21 [2025/09/21 17:38] – [Meeting Notes] sarahsocnet_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 41: Line 41:
 **Our working hypothesis** is that a locally-controlled / decentralised digital town hall can enable community connections and resilience while resisting corporate domination and centralisation. **Our working hypothesis** is that a locally-controlled / decentralised digital town hall can enable community connections and resilience while resisting corporate domination and centralisation.
  
-**Identifying primary target users of the platform** is important because it enables us to identify, select and prioritise the use cases to guide platform selection, and create supporting resources and capabilities, develop onboarding plans. We identified several community groups as examples of the types of organisations we might target; involving groups like these will provide an active base for wider take-up:+**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 outreachcreation of supporting resources and capabilities, and development of onboarding plans. We identified several community groups as examples of the types of organisations we might target; involving groups like these will provide an active base for wider take-up:
   * Brunswick Tool Library    * Brunswick Tool Library 
   * Good Karma Network   * Good Karma Network
Line 49: Line 49:
   * Library Services    * 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: **Essentials for successful launch and uptake** include:
Line 55: Line 55:
   * ability to sign-up using conventional email / mobile AND sign-up in a blackout   * 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    * pathways to find things: connect with familiar groups and interests, discovery 
-  * first-time user experience and appearance are not off-putting+  * 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)   * account management capabilities for individuals and admin (password change and reset is possible; security is not overwhelming or obstacles)
-  *  +  * stewardship, including active content creation, structuring (e.g. taxonomies or tagging), moderation and culture setting
- +
- +
- +
-This intersects with activist groups  +
  
 +**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?  
  
-Principles +**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, interoperable, robust. 
  
-==== Level 3 Headline ==== 
  

This website uses cookies. By using the website, you agree with storing cookies on your computer. Also, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy. If you do not agree, please leave the website.

More information