TheCapitalClinic

I think that this is an extremely insightful overview of the power of networks. I would like to add three specific comments and perhaps encourage you to perhaps add the following concept to your thinking.

First, as I visually imagine your thesis of Level I and II, a picture of two concentric circles comes to mind. Level I relationships that have immediate connections back to the origin and Level II connections which contemplate networks that stem from each of the Level I relationships. However, an important phenomenon takes place when there is an intersection of networks whereby multiple intersections may in fact triangulate back to the origin. In other words, when two (or more) separate users in two (or more) separate networks realize that they share a common connection with the origin, I would argue that the glue (or stickiness) of the connection is actually a stronger bond. Even more simply stated, birds of a feather flock together. Perhaps the point to consider is the "compounding effect" when two networks actually intersect and create an even stronger network. Thus, visually, I might imagine a three dimensional model whereby overlapping networks are actually thicker (more robust) then uni-dimensional connections.

Second, all networks need to consider the stickiness or bond between users. I feel this is especially important to emphasize given a simple truth that while a network may be large, if the bonds are not strong, the network will break. Think of what happens in a military coup or mutiny where a network is large, but a "loose bond" in that network could in fact cause the entire network to collapse. In some ways this concept can be thought of as a "reverse tipping point" where a break in the network will actually use the same network to create a viral phenomenon that will destroy the very existence of that network.

Third, you referred to search engines in your overview. As such, I would like to introduce the concept of how new (and previously unlinked) networks can join a network. This is what search engine marketing strategies (SEM) attempt to do - in essence to create a new network or connection using search technologies. This becomes an easy way for an unaffiliated user, who uses a search engine to find out about a specific topic and potentially become a new node on the network as the user begins to interact with other individuals on the network. It follows that the more links there are to a certain network, the more opportunities for a search engine bot to crawl that network, and thus elevate it in the search ranking. A perfect example is simply typing "Fuzz" into Google's search bar. As you know Fuzz can mean many things - the police, a piece of lint, a guitar effect, whatever. The item that pops up first is actually the Fuzz community - lots of links and networks within networks...

So, to illustrate my thoughts:

Point 1 - overlapping networks have stronger bonds: person A is linked to person B, person B is linked to person C. When persons A and C realize that they are both connected to B, there's a natural reason for A and C to connect. Thus, what once had two links (A to B and B to C), now has three links (A to B, B to C, and C to A), thus making the network stronger and overlapping.

Point 2 - the bonds between networks need to be refreshed and strengthened as stale bonds grow weak. If person A primarily communicates with person B, but not with person C (even though they have been lifelong friends - ring a bell?), the bond between A and C may break. If the phenomenon continues, the entire network can virally break as "bad news" spreads throughout the network and creates a systemic collapse.

Point 3 - all networks need to find ways to add more nodes and invite other networks to join. External means such as search engines have become a critical part in creating a link to a previously undiscovered network. Intrinsically, this is critical to the livelihood of any network (or empire) to expand and bring new membership to an existing infrastructure. Persons A, B, and C are happily coexisting with an entirely unrelated network of persons X, Y, and Z. If the through some external means both networks become linked, there's a chance of a stronger (and larger network) and well, just a bigger party that has a better chance of attracting a larger membership. Bringing networks together through a catalyst is a powerful means to build larger communities...

Food for thought...

Wow, this right here = "1. First, as I have stated before on this site, I think the amount of OUTPUT one gets from a network is directly a function of the INPUT you put into it.. "

Is kind of synonymous with the last words from "Abbey Road" (not including the very quick tune "Her Majesty" at the very very end of the classic album)... would you agree?

That is a multi level, possibly multi-dimensional, and for sure a universal statement you made there, and is the absolute word of truth.

Hmmm. Presumably what's called online communities could be better described as online towns. And Fuzz is a small but interesting town, with Jeff being head of urban planning, and TCC a star architect who gives advise for free. The users are able to move from town to town, and - they can even have homes in several towns. They will spend time in the towns according to their criteria, e.g. where they know the most people, or where the streets are the fastest, or where there's the biggest chance to find a new love, or where the best restaurants, sports events and rock concerts are. So what are the nodes? Maybe it's the restaurant owner, who invites the local baseball team to talk to the fans, who invites musicians to play in his restaurant and on his weekly holiday let's sports car freaks use his parking lot for meetings and repairing sessions. Now it's up to Jeff and his urban planning crew to plan an infrastructure where that restaurant owner can easily cook his superb meals, can advertise and get a lot of attention, won't be beaten up by criminals. And they are to establish an environment where people have as much freedom of choice as possible, e.g. about being friendly or distanced to strangers, meet only their best friends or prefer to get to know new people each day, etc. In a virtual town the software is the one to enable the townsmen to exert their activities, plus the planning team's decisions where to allow which kinds of buildings and activities are equally important as the software's technical skills.

Tibii, I like your analogy of developing online communities and managing towns .

Since music derives much of its energy locally, it may well best to keep fuzz a small town - or as it grows, to remain a collection of unique villages tied together like a string of pearls [switching metaphors].

tibii, Thanks for your further observations at my Profile Page. I am totally taken with your notion of "an anarchistic Utopia"!. In order that reader os this blog may follow, and possibly develop, your points, I "copy and paste" them below:

tibii said:
posted on May 9 at 11:30 pm
Hi there. Yes with the growing number of users I think it's quite logical that you do not speak that much with old friends, but that's ok, because the old friends have to do with many new friends too. Still they remain friends.

As for the largeness of this town called Fuzz: Competing in this large global economy means that it makes sense to have a very large unit. I think it would even make sense if this was not a capitalistic competition but let's say an anarchistic Utopia. Because many people working together can achieve more than individuals all trying to potter about small parts of the infrastructure.
The good thing about the internet though is that you can switch easily from life in the big unit to life in a small unit. In real life only the very very rich can afford to live in a small quiet idyllic beautiful place and STILL be near to a big city's center where the action is and where you can meet lots of fast, loud and interesting people. Online you can have this for free (provided that the infrastructure makes enough money to pay for it all, hence my support for the bigness of the entity!).

The software should enable the user to be part of a big city and still have smaller communities (villages), where he also can go to. As much freedom of choice as possible, then the population will love the administration. Especially on Fuzz, because the population knows that the administration is not some anonymous corporate robots (though corporate they surely must be too in order for the place to keep up the infrastructure), but guys like themselves, and therefore the townsmen like their administration - which might not be the case in most of the other towns.
So if the entitiy gets bigger it can afford more people working on the infrastructure which includes small villages being part of the big infrastructure.

tibii, To elaborate, I think fuzz is finally coming of age with some potential to be, as you put it, an anarchistic Utopia.

To achieve this idealized state, you need both (1) many residents who may enjoy the quick-time casualness of the Blip and (2) your more involved connections in various villages of increasing degree of special interests and intimacy.

IMHO the key is to have both big and small at the same time in the crazy pattern of sophisticated urban life full of complexity and surprise.