Now I’m reading a piece by Peter Kollock. I think it was a conference paper, as it’s quite short. He looks at theories of community which could be applied to internet communities.

Looking at them, I think i shows that the theory was generally wrong – these aren’t guidelines for all types of community as they don’t fit virtual communities.

So, communities and virtual communities are different. OK, nothing very surprising there.

He looks at Axelrod’s requirements for the possibility of cooperation. I don’t know how widely cited these are – but I can pick holes in them after about 10 seconds’ thought, so I’ll ignore those.

Then he looks at Ostrom’s design principles of successful communities:
* Group boundaries are clearly defined
* Rules governing the use of collective goods are well matched to local needs and conditions
* Most individuals affected by these rules can participate in modifying the rules
* the right of community members to devise their own rules is respected by external authorities
* A system for monitoring members’ behaviour exists; this monitoring is undertaken by the community members themselves
* A graduated system of sanctions is used
* Community members have access to low-cost conflict resolution mechanisms.
These seem very democratic – I’m not sure a feudal community would work with this definition. In fact, I think ‘most individuals affected by these rules can participate in modifying the rules’ is the most problematic. Would this work in a convent, a tyranny, a primary school..?

They’re interesting considerations, but I don’t think I’d taken them as the basis for setting up a FirstClass conference.