There are many kinds of models. Some models simplify the world, to focus on only the most important issues. This is not the case here, on the contrary, our community model is intended to open up the "social" and "cultural" issues around computer-mediated communities. In that sense, it might make the world more complicated.

Some models are predictable models. For instance, if you do x, then y will happen. This is not the case here either, because our community model raises questions. It is a sensitising tool, enables you to ask the right questions.

Still other models are supposed to be used like a recipe, first do this, then do that. This is not the case here either, because the social processes do not have any inherent order, especially if you use the model broadly, i.e., as a viewpoint storage helping to catch socially relevant perpectives. You can analyse as many of them in any order as you like. Except for the primary activity and in many cases technology related to that activity, they should be discussed first. Furthermore, the specific site (and its satellites) could be seen as processes inwhich sociality is more intertwined with "technical" matters, whereas the rest of the list is deals with more freely "social" issues. If the fourth theme, organisational phenomena, is taken as given, it may be counted as not-so-social thing. In some cases, say, as in thinking of informal social phenomena inside organizations, it is of course central parts of the "social" category. This division may be worth remembering when choosing the processes to be considered more carefully.

By mikael at 2006-02-23 16:26