Something Completely Different: a writing-related post

[hrj]

This post is an experiment in a sort of “distributed writers’ discussion community” concept that green_knight has proposed. The basic idea (interpreted through my understanding) is to try to develop a system … a set of habits … a process for using LJ (and, potentially, other similar media) to create the sort of ongoing communal discussion on common topics of interest that many of us fondly (if not always accurately) remember usenet being in The Olden Days. In brief, the idea is for the discussion to take place either in individual journals, or in a purpose-created lj community, or in both, with a system of cross-posted pointers to alert people to a relevant post. Said cross-posted pointers would be placed in the individual posters’ journals, in the community, in comments on discussion threads in other journals, with the idea being to funnel readers through to the discussion in a single click. Another part of the concept would be to encourage evolving discussions to be re-posted as new threads on a relatively short cycle time (to avoid the awkwardness involved in LJ’s short attention span).

This is, perhaps, more introduction than an experimental post ought to include, but the concept will need some initial explanation to make sense. So this post will “live” on my journal, with the preceding information cross-posted in rasfc followed by a link to the post in my journal. Another, briefer, pointer will be posted in the discussion on green_knight’s journal that proposed the idea. And now, on to the post itself.

Many online communities “just grow” and either evolve into something useful or comfortable by chance, or wither and die either for lack of a critical mass or because they duplicated functions that the participants already had elsewhere. If a new purpose-created community is going to get a good start, it can help to start with some explicit ideas of what people want to get out of it: what sorts of discussions and interactions are likely to lead them to participate regularly and what sorts of discussions and interactions are likely to attract new, contributing members to the community. So that’s the topic for my experimental post here: what do people look for in an online writers’ community that will make it a worthwhile and productive experience?

I know that for me the most important function of the community is to give me … well, a community. A group of people who are doing similar things and sharing similar experiences and who don’t need to be brought up to speed when I have a technical question or a bit of news or insight to share. I’m looking for a relaxed but professional atmosphere (“professional” both in the sense of writing for a market and in the sense of taking the process seriously) where ideas and experiences are shared without people feeling the need to second-guess what’s “safe” to post. My own personal working style doesn’t tend to include looking for input on the actual text of in-process writing projects. (I’m one of those people who can either tell the story or write the story but not usually both.) But I’m very interested in sharing methodology, research resources, and other process-related topics.

I know there are a lot of other things people look for in a community – how about it?

Comments

[hrj.livejournal.com]

One of the differences in dynamic is that LJ spaces are "owned" -- the conversations go on in people's metaphoric living rooms. Or to use a different image: I've always felt like Usenet was the main programming at the sf con while LJ was private room parties. (I have an extended examination of the metaphor elsewhere. (http://hrj.livejournal.com/82752.html)) The social signals can be very confused when you aren't sure how "open" a conversation is (assuming an unlocked post), or when you've gotten there via a friend of a friend of a friend.

Part of the idea here is to develop an overt "public discussion space" focused on a relatively specific activity/topic, but manifesting across individual journals. Something slightly different from an ad hoc multi-node network of friends who happen to be interested in similar topics, but a network of specific posts of interest to a self-identified community who may not have the time or interest to "friend" everyone participating in the discussion.

[ursula]

My greatest difficulty in sf fan circles, online & off, is that I think like a critic, rather than a fan, which is a source of infinite faux pas . . .

So, it sounds like you want a version of flycon2009 that isn't bound to a specific weekend? (Do you know sartorias? It seems like you might.)

[hrj.livejournal.com]

The "sf con" thing was more intended as a metaphor than a description of this concept we're exploring. The model is a bit more like a writers' group, although in truth it's an attempt to recapture some of the things that used to work very well in rec.arts.sf.composition but don't work so well any more. Definitely not like flycon, as such -- probably not intended as anywhere near that organized. I don't know sartorias personally, although the name is familiar.

[green-knight.livejournal.com]

sartorias is YA writer Sherwood Smith, and you've probably met her at cons. (Her books are on my 'to read' list, and she often hosts interesting discussions.)