an "elite private list" is one which has a rather narrow focus of topic, and is available by invitation only, to a group of academics and public policy types who are quite knowledgable about that topic. Occasionally an invitation has been extended to an individual who did not meet these criteria, and they have been asked to explore other lists.

One theory I have heard expressed is that status in virtual communities is achieved by quantity of posting, regardless of quality
How can we define status. For instance, what would constitute the status of "leader" of an e-list? I can't quite conceptualize what would make one the leader of an e-list. Would it be the creator of the list, by default, or one of the posters who seems to direct the major conversation topics, or the poster who could get the most other participants to agree with thier views?

I would imagine the leader emerges through a combination of 1) posting quality material regularly 2) discussions privately with other posters on the list and 3) is already recognized as an authority on the e-list subject in the "real" world.

Yep. Power and status in virtual communities is achieved more by volume than content, but content does count. Short, concise notes that can be read without scrolling, yet make a relevant point, often raise the poster's status
two hungarian dachshunds meet on a streetcorner. one turns to the other and says: "yes, but back in hungary i was a st.bernard."
However, I think the "short posts" thing is a bit of a red herring. Some people have no patience with listening (reading)... and will only tolerate short posts. Others are willing to hear out someone's "whole story".
i really like to see posturing for stature on lists. it's always :vastly amusing - all these tiny blackandwhite letters, snip-snapping. just :like a cute little doggie.:-)
We all "posture for stature" on lists (and in groups generally, I s'pose). It can be subtle or embarrassingly overt. Some of us are shy, some overly theoretical, some exceedingly pithy, some come out swinging.
So many of you are so busy nattering and posturing that you cannot be inlcusive. Says a lot to me.
status on the Net is in part tied up with what type of access one has,
More relevant here, the "information superhighway" has up-ended traditional notions of social access and popularity. Nerds who never before were invited to parties are now the best persons to host them in cyber-land.. . . Those who deal far more comfortably with machines than with people are now, in this medium, better equipped to deal with people, too
it's a new medium, with new social conventions, shifts in social power and influence, new (or quite altered) ways of relating.
Return to Index