I don't think, by the way, that Gladwell's 150 figure applies directly to fandoms; I think it's more like 500 to 1000. With a corporation, either you're an employee or you're not, and if you're in, you're in all the way. It's similar with churches; there can be some part-time attenders on the fringes, but usually only a few (except at churches which are well beyond the 150 mark anyway). But in an online community, if you've got 500 members, maybe only 100 will be consistent, "full-time" participants, and so most of the discussions going on will be among people who know each other fairly well. But at some point beyond that (maybe 800?), you start getting more and more people who are active members but not really in touch with the original community's philosophy, and the leadership has to either crack down or allow for a philosophical dilution of the community (neither of which they'll generally find desirable).
But ultimately the same "tipping point" principle is true. When you're having a discussion among people who value their relationship with each other, the discussion will usually be civil and mature (and even the younger members will often learn maturity in that environment). But in a larger community, relationships are valued less (or, more to the point, discussions are conducted more between people who don't mutually value their relationship), and fandom sanity becomes more and more difficult to find.
(Apologies for dumping a two-comment essay on you here; but thanks for triggering some interesting ideas in my mind.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-18 03:38 pm (UTC)I don't think, by the way, that Gladwell's 150 figure applies directly to fandoms; I think it's more like 500 to 1000. With a corporation, either you're an employee or you're not, and if you're in, you're in all the way. It's similar with churches; there can be some part-time attenders on the fringes, but usually only a few (except at churches which are well beyond the 150 mark anyway). But in an online community, if you've got 500 members, maybe only 100 will be consistent, "full-time" participants, and so most of the discussions going on will be among people who know each other fairly well. But at some point beyond that (maybe 800?), you start getting more and more people who are active members but not really in touch with the original community's philosophy, and the leadership has to either crack down or allow for a philosophical dilution of the community (neither of which they'll generally find desirable).
But ultimately the same "tipping point" principle is true. When you're having a discussion among people who value their relationship with each other, the discussion will usually be civil and mature (and even the younger members will often learn maturity in that environment). But in a larger community, relationships are valued less (or, more to the point, discussions are conducted more between people who don't mutually value their relationship), and fandom sanity becomes more and more difficult to find.
(Apologies for dumping a two-comment essay on you here; but thanks for triggering some interesting ideas in my mind.)