African Ethics and Online Communities: An Argument for a Virtual Communitarianism

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 103-118
Author(s):  
Stephen Nkansah Morgan ◽  
Beatrice Okyere-Manu
Keyword(s):  
Online Communities ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Strong Sense ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Group Solidarity ◽  
African Ethics ◽  
Virtual Platform

A virtual community is generally described as a group of people with shared interests, ideas, and goals in a particular digital group or virtual platform. Virtual communities have become ubiquitous in recent times, and almost everyone belongs to one or multiple virtual communities. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, with its associated national lockdowns, has made virtual communities more essential and a necessary part of our daily lives, whether for work and business, educational purposes or keeping in touch with friends and family. Given these facts, how do we ensure that virtual communities become a true community qua community? We address this question by proposing and arguing for a ‘virtual communitarianism’—an online community that integrates essential features of traditional African communitarianism in its outlook and practice. The paper’s position is that virtual communitarianism can make for a strong ethical virtual community where members can demonstrate a strong sense of group solidarity, care and compassion towards each other. The inclusion of these virtues can bring members who often are farapart and help create a stronger community bond. This will ensure that the evolution of virtual communities does not happen without the integration of progressive African communitarian values.

A Framework for Analyzing Online Communities

2012 ◽  
pp. 129-143
Author(s):  
M. Gordon Hunter ◽  
Rosemary Stockdale
Keyword(s):  
Online Communities ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Community Organizations ◽  
Value Proposition ◽  
Group Interactions ◽  
Community Needs ◽  
Important Stage ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Definition Of

This paper examines online communities and describes how they can be differentiated from other Internet supported group interactions. A definition of an online community is given and three generic types are identified. These types are defined by the community models based on the value proposition for the sponsors and members. The value proposition for members is strongly influenced by the model, as facilities and opportunities for interaction are structured by the site sponsors. Where online communities offer fulfillment of specific needs, people participate and become members. Additional benefits enhance the value of membership and encourage retention and greater interactivity. Significant benefits are gained from online communities for businesses, NGOs, other community organizations and individuals. Identifying the different types of communities and their characteristics is an important stage in developing greater understanding of how virtual communities can contribute to businesses, healthcare, community needs and a myriad of other contexts. Examples of the three generic types of online communities are included for further edification.

Using Social Network Analysis to Guide Theoretical Sampling in an Ethnographic Study of a Virtual Community

2011 ◽  
pp. 157-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique Murillo
Keyword(s):  
Social Network ◽  
Social Network Analysis ◽  
Network Analysis ◽  
Online Communities ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
The Social ◽  
Theoretical Sampling

Social Network Analysis (SNA) provides a range of models particularly well suited for mapping bonds between participants in online communities and thus reveal prominent members or subgroups. This can yield valuable insights for selecting a theoretical sample of participants or participant interactions in qualitative studies of communities. This chapter describes a procedure for collecting data from Usenet newsgroups, deriving the social network created by participant interaction, and importing this relational data into SNA software, where various cohesion models can be applied. The technique is exemplified by performing a longitudinal core periphery analysis of a specific newsgroup, which identified core members and provided clear evidence of a stable online community. Discussions dominated by core members are identified next, to guide theoretical sampling of text-based interactions in an ongoing ethnography of the community.

Online Communities and Community Building

2011 ◽  
pp. 2893-2898
Author(s):  
Martin C. Kindsmüller ◽  
Sandro Leuchter ◽  
Leon Urbas
Keyword(s):  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Computer Mediated ◽  
Bulletin Boards ◽  
Real Community ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Tacit Assumptions

“Online community” is one of today’s buzzwords. Even though superficially it is not hard to understand, the term has become somewhat vague while being extensively used within the e-commerce business. Within this article, we refer to online community as being a voluntary group of users who partake actively in a certain computer-mediated service. The term “online community” is preferred over the term “virtual community,” as it denotes the character of the community more accurately: community members are interacting online as opposed to face to face. Furthermore, the term “virtual community” seems too unspecific, because it includes other communities that only exist virtually, whereas an online community in our definition is always a real community in the sense that community members know that they are part of the community. Nevertheless, there are other reasonable definitions of online community. An early and most influencing characterization (which unfortunately utilizes the term “virtual community”) was coined by Howard Rheingold (1994), who wrote: “…virtual communities are cultural aggregations that emerge when enough people bump into each other often enough in cyberspace. A virtual community is a group of people […] who exchanges words and ideas through the mediation of computer bulletin boards and networks” (p. 57). A more elaborated and technical definition of online community was given by Jenny Preece (2000), which since then, has been a benchmark for developers. She stated that an online community consists of four basic constituents (Preece, 2000, p. 3): 1. Socially interacting people striving to satisfy their own needs. 2. A shared purpose, such as interest or need that provides a reason to cooperate. 3. Policies in the form of tacit assumptions, rituals, or rules that guide the community members’ behavior. 4. A technical system that works as a carrier that mediates social interaction. Not explicitly mentioned in this characterization but nevertheless crucial for our aforementioned definition (and not in opposition to Preece’s position) is voluntary engagement.

Virtual Community as New Marketing Channel

2011 ◽  
pp. 524-526
Author(s):  
Chingning Wang ◽  
Kangning Wei ◽  
Michelle L. Kaarst-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Online Communities ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Marketing Channel ◽  
Social Events ◽  
Internet Users ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Bulletin Boards ◽  
Promotional Messages ◽  
Business Structure

Virtual community is a virtual meeting place where individuals with common areas of interests share information, ideas, experiences, and feelings (Rheingold, 1993) by using information and communication technology (ICT), especially the Internet and the World Wide Web (WWW). It has been taken for granted that people with shared interests would aggregate together. This assumption is equally applicable to the virtual world. As such, a wide variety of discussion topics bring different Internet users together online across time and space. Virtual community has been a pervasive concept emphasizing social aggregation and social events in the computer-mediated environment. This concept has been extended to the horizon of commerce. Hagel and Armstrong (1997) contend in their book, Net Gain, that virtual community could be an important element of a successful Web-based business structure and that community-based business structure helps expand markets for businesses. Businesses have increasingly begun to recognize that they can build their brand images, deliver promotional messages, and retain consumers’ loyalty through online communities. As such, more and more businesses include bulletin boards, discussion groups, and e-mail functions in their business Web sites with the aim to creating a community atmosphere among their customers (Maclaran & Catterall, 2002). This strategy not only helps attract consumers but also helps increase return rate (Hagel, 1999). In the long run, it could promote favorable attitude toward the brand and increase purchasing behavior (Subramaniam, Shaw, & Gardner, 2000). Indeed, virtual communities have opened up new opportunities and established new models for business to reach out and communicate with their consumers. Although the market has become more and more fragmented with the globalization of commerce, virtual communities provide businesses with access to targeted consumers in that various aggregations of Internet users are like different segments of markets. Virtual community indeed has become a new marketing channel for business. Many online communities are business oriented in nature with business participating as organizers, sponsors, or advertisers.

Virtual Communities and Social Capital Theory

2011 ◽  
pp. 493-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine M. Ridings
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Online Communities ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
Social Capital Theory ◽  
Community Context ◽  
Capital Theory ◽  
Physically Based ◽  
Civic Group

Imagine a neighborhood where young children can play freely in the streets and various backyards without direct parental oversight, the implication being that other adults in the vicinity will watch out for the children. If a parent is late getting home before the school bus, the children know which neighbors’ house to go to and will be well cared for until the parent arrives home. The residents are very willing to help each other, perhaps by moving a sofa down to a basement or lending a ladder for a project. In such a neighborhood, the first place one turns to for recommendations for plumbers, dry cleaners, and preschools, or perhaps to borrow a tool, is each other. Perhaps one person has secured a job for a neighbor’s daughter, and another family has “paved the way” for their neighbor’s entry into a country club. If a person has a need for emotional support to deal with a personal crisis, she turns to a neighbor. Such a neighborhood can be said to have social capital—that resource that comes from relations between people that makes lives more productive and easier. Social capital is not only created from groups of people living in very close proximity, such as in a neighborhood. It might be created between people belonging to the same church or civic group, or perhaps between people who met at a hospital support group for a particular affliction, or people who are alumni of a particular university. These groups of people can be said to constitute communities, or gatherings of people who have common interests or ties. In the past, these communities tended also to be focused in a local geographic area. This article will examine social capital in the context on online communities. Online communities, like physically based communities such as church groups or neighborhoods, can also be said to produce social capital for their members. These virtual communities can create and foster social capital—and indeed, it may be social capital that draws and retains their members. The background of social capital theory will be examined and then applied in the virtual community context.

MOOS as Virtual Communities

2011 ◽  
pp. 329-333
Author(s):  
Shannon Roper ◽  
Sharmila Pixy Ferris
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Worlds ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Social Constructs ◽  
Book Series ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Defined Culture

Many researchers have observed that the Internet has changed the concept of virtual communities (Barnes, 2001, 2003; Jones, 1995, 1998; Rheingold, 1993). A unique example of virtual communities is a MOO—a specialized interactive online community that is usually based on a work of fiction such as book series, theater or television (Bartle, 1990). MOOs share many of the features of multi-user dimensions (MUDs) in that both allow participants to create their own virtual worlds, but some researchers consider MOOs to be “more sophisticated” (Barnes, 2001, p. 94). In a MOO community, the participants or “players” create their own virtual communities—fantasy communities complete with world structures, interpersonal norms and social constructs. Individual participants create characters complete with environment, history and personality constructs. The characters interact and influence each other and their environments, just as do the members of real-world communities. The MOO discussed in this case study is based on acclaimed fantasy author Anne McCaffery’s book series set on the fictional world of “Pern.” The players on DragonWings1 MOO create and develop characters over long periods, often many years, leading to the establishment and creation of a strong MOO. In this article we provide a case study of the DragonWings MOO as a unique virtual community. Because the concept of virtual communities is evolving with the Internet, and no definitive understanding of virtual community or virtual culture yet exists, we have chosen to structure our analysis of DragonWings MOO around the classical anthropological definition of culture and community. A seminal definition of culture, first articulated by Tylor (1871), provides the springboard for a number of anthropological definitions widely used today. Building on Tylor, White (1959), a prominent cultural scholar, defined culture as “within human organisms, i.e., concepts, beliefs, emotions, attitudes; within processes of social interaction among human beings; and within natural objects” (p. 237). He also identified symbols as a primary defining characteristic of culture. White’s simple yet comprehensive definition yields clear criteria that lend themselves to our analysis of MOOs. At the broadest level, an application of the criteria provides support for the acceptance of the Internet as a distinct and unique culture. At a more particular level, they provide a convenient tool for the analysis of a MOO as a virtual community. In the remainder of this article, we will utilize the definition outlined above to demonstrate the features that make DragonWings MOO a unique example of a virtual community.

Information Navigation and Knowledge Discovery in Virtual Communities

2011 ◽  
pp. 273-278
Author(s):  
Wenyuan Li ◽  
Kok-Leong Ong
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Discovery ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Computer Mediated Communication ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Media Technology ◽  
Mediated Communication ◽  
Information Navigation

Over the past decade, advances in the Internet and media technology have literally brought people closer than ever before. It is interesting to note that traditional sociological definitions of a community have been outmoded, for community has extended far beyond the geographical boundaries that were held by traditional definitions (Wellman & Gulia, 1999). Virtual or online community was defined in such a context to describe various forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC). Although virtual communities do not necessarily arise from the Internet, the overwhelming popularity of the Internet is one of the main reasons that virtual communities receive so much attention (Rheingold, 1999). The beginning of virtual communities is attributed to scientists who exchanged information and cooperatively conduct research during the 1970s. There are four needs of participants in a virtual community: member interest, social interaction, imagination, and transaction (Hagel & Armstrong, 1997). The first two focus more on the information exchange and knowledge discovery; the imagination is for entertainment; and the transaction is for commerce strategy. In this article, we investigate the function of information exchange and knowledge discovery in virtual communities. There are two important inherent properties embedded in virtual communities (Wellman, 2001):

Detecting and Responding to Online Deception

2011 ◽  
pp. 121-124
Author(s):  
Neil C. Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Online Communities ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Detecting Deception ◽  
Detection Of Deception ◽  
Online Deception

An important problem in online communities is detection of deception by their members. Deception is a form of manipulation, and can have many varied negative consequences in a virtual community, especially once discovered (Joinson & Dietz-Uhler, 2002) and even if undiscovered. Virtual communities need to be aware of the problems and need to agree on policies for detecting deception and responding to it.

Potentials of Information Technology in Building Virtual Communities

2011 ◽  
pp. 836-841 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isola Ajiferuke ◽  
Alexander Markus
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Worlds ◽  
Online Communities ◽  
Virtual Communities ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Bulletin Board ◽  
Digital Subscriber Line ◽  
Message Boards ◽  
Mailing Lists ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
E Mail

In recent years, virtual communities have become the topic of countless books, journal articles and television shows, but what are they, and where did they come from? According to Preece, Maloney-Krichmar, and Abras (2003), the roots of virtual communities date back to as early as 1971 when e-mail first made its appearance on the Advanced Research Projects Agency Network (ARPANET), which was created by the United State’s Department of Defense. This network would lead to the development of dial-up bulletin board systems (BBSs) which would allow people to use their modems to connect to remote computers and participate in the exchange of e-mail and the first discussion boards. From these beginnings a host of multi user domains (MUDs) and multi-user object oriented domains (MOOs) would spring up all over the wired world. These multi-user environments would allow people to explore an imaginary space and would allow them to interact both with the electronic environment and other users. Additionally, listservs (or mailing lists) sprang up in 1986, and now, almost two decades later, they are still in use as the major method of communication among groups of people sharing common personal or professional interests (L-Soft, 2003). Since then the Internet has exploded due to the development of Web browsers as well as the development of communications technologies such as broadband, digital subscriber line (DSL), and satellite communications. Groups of people from as few as two and reaching to many thousands now communicate via email, chat, and online communities such as the Whole Earth ‘Lectronic Link (WELL) and such services as MSN, Friendster, America Online (AoL), Geocities, and Yahoo! Groups. Other examples of online communities are collaborative encyclopedias like Wikipedia. Web logs (Blogs) like Slashdot.com and LiveJournal allow users to create their own content and also to comment on the content of others. They also allow the users to create identities and to make virtual “friends” with other users. The definition of virtual community itself becomes as convoluted as the multitude of technologies that drives it. Are e-mail lists, message boards, and chat rooms online communities or are they virtual communities? Virtual communities might be persistent worlds as those found in popular online games (Everquest, 2004, Ultima Online, 2004) or virtual worlds (such as MUDs and MOOs) where the user is able to explore a simulated world or to take on a digital “physicality” in the form of an avatar. It becomes clear from the literature that the terms are still used interchangeably.

Online Communities and Community Building

2005 ◽  
pp. 2203-2208
Author(s):  
Martin C. Kindsmuller ◽  
Sandro Leuchter ◽  
Leon Urbas
Keyword(s):  
Online Communities ◽  
Online Community ◽  
Community Building ◽  
Virtual Community ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Computer Mediated ◽  
Real Community

“Online community” is one of today’s buzzwords. Even though superficially it is not hard to understand, the term has become somewhat vague while being extensively used within the e-commerce business. Within this article, we refer to online community as being a voluntary group of users who partake actively in a certain computer-mediated service. The term “online community” is preferred over the term “virtual community,” as it denotes the character of the community more accurately: community members are interacting online as opposed to face to face. Furthermore, the term “virtual community” seems too unspecific, because it includes other communities that only exist virtually, whereas an online community in our definition is always a real community in the sense that community members know that they are part of the community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document