- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-l] In Greece, use a Game Boy, go to jail
by ctimurkan 07 Sep '02

07 Sep '02

An unfortunate incident from Greece, a member of European Union! Cem ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: jeremy hunsinger <jhuns(a)vt.edu> Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 08:01:07 -0400 >this seems a bit draconian to me... > >In Greece, use a Game Boy, go to jail >By Matt Loney and Rupert Goodwins >Staff Writers, CNET News.com >September 3, 2002, 11:18 AM PT > > >In Greece, playing a shoot-'em-up video game could land you in jail. > >The Greek government has banned all electronic games across the >country, including those that run on home computers, on Game Boy-style >portable consoles, and on mobile phones. Thousands of tourists in >Greece are unknowingly facing heavy fines or long terms in prison for >owning mobile phones or portable video games. > >Greek Law Number 3037, enacted at the end of July, explicitly forbids >electronic games with "electronic mechanisms and software" from public >and private places, and people have already been fined tens of >thousands of dollars for playing or owning games > >http://news.com.com/2100-1040-956357.html > >jeremy hunsinger >jhuns(a)vt.edu >on the ibook >www.cddc.vt.edu >www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy >www.dromocracy.com >() ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail >/\ - against microsoft attachments > > >_______________________________________________ >Air-l mailing list >Air-l(a)aoir.org >http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l >

1 0

textbook recommendation please: Intellectual property in digital age
by Ed Lamoureux 07 Sep '02

07 Sep '02

I'm searching for a good/new textbook on Intellectual property rights/issues in the digital age. Suggestions? thanks Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D. Associate Professor Department of Communication: Speech Multimedia Program Editor, Journal of Communication and Religion ell(a)bradley.edu http://hilltop.bradley.edu/~ell

7 6

Now available: Dark Fiber by Geert Lovink
by geert lovink 07 Sep '02

07 Sep '02

Dark Fiber Tracking Critical Internet Culture Geert Lovink The MIT Press September 2002 ISBN 0-262-12249-9 7 x 9, 394 pp. $29.95/£19.95 (CLOTH) http://mitpress.mit.edu/

1 0

law at the borders
by Sandra Braman 06 Sep '02

06 Sep '02

The Communication Law & Policy Division of the International Communication Association encourages AOIR members to submit papers and panel proposals in the following areas for the May 23-27 2003 conference in San Diego. Submission deadline is Nov. 1. Internet- related research could fall into several of these categories. Borders of the law: What happens when what has traditionally been acknowledged as law and regulation is supplemented, supplanted, or replaced by other structural forces such as the software and hardware of infrastructure design? Law of border communities: What kinds of legal and regulatory trends in the areas of information, communication, and culture are being seen in border cultures such as maquiladoras? The law as a border: How does the law serve as a border past which communications cannot flow, change cannot occur, or activities cannot be undertaken? Law in a border era: The difficulty of communication law and policy today is that it must find ways of achieving incremental change during a period of radical transitions. How does the transitional, or border, nature of the era affect the nature of law and policy? Paper submissions will be electronic; see conference website at www.icahdq.org. Warning: Submit your paper as early as possible because: (1) inevitably the server handling submissions will be overwhelmed and become unavailable the day of the deadline, and (2) there may be aspects of the process that are unfamiliar to you if you've not submitted papers electronically before. Panel submissions -- 250 word rationale for the panel, 250 word abstracts for each paper to be included, and bio for each panelist -- should go directly to the division chair at the below e-mail address. Sandra Braman Chair Communication Law & Policy Division International Communication Association braman(a)uwm.edu

1 0

Pew Internet Report: Web use post 9-11 one year later (fwd)
by Barry Wellman 06 Sep '02

06 Sep '02

fyi Barry ___________________________________________________________________ Barry Wellman Professor of Sociology NetLab Director wellman(a)chass.utoronto.ca http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman Centre for Urban & Community Studies University of Toronto 455 Spadina Avenue Toronto Canada M5S 2G8 fax:+1-416-978-7162 ___________________________________________________________________ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 11:38:05 -0400 From: Tom Spooner <tspooner(a)pewinternet.org> To: wellman(a)chass.utoronto.ca Subject: Pew Internet Report: Web use post 9-11 one year later One Year Later: September 11 and the Internet More than two-thirds of Americans (69%) say the government should do everything it can to keep information out of terrorists hands, even if that means the public will be deprived of information it needs or wants. Similar percentages of Americans approve of officials steps to remove information from government Web sites that could be useful to terrorists. Even people who favor wide disclosure of information online generally support government policies to remove that information if officials argue it could aid terrorists. For instance, 60% of those who believe the government should post information about chemical plants and the chemicals they produce say that material should be removed from the Internet if the government said it could help terrorists. Though they demonstrate a willingness to cede power to officials over what to disclose online, a plurality of Americans believe that taking government information off the Internet will not make a difference in battling terrorists. In addition, citizens are sharply divided on the question of whether the government should be able to monitor peoples email and online activities. The division is this: 47% of Americans believe the government should not have the right to monitor peoples Internet use and 45% say the government should have that right. A majority of Internet users oppose government monitoring of peoples email and Web activities. These are among the findings in a new survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project taken between June 26 and July 26 of 2,501 American adults. The results are published in a report entitled One Year Later: September 11 and the Internet. It is a wide-ranging examination of what people feel government disclosure policies should be, how Americans online behavior has changed since 9/11, and how the Web itself changed as producers responded to the crisis. The Pew Internet Project report contains the first scholarly studies built around analysis of hundreds of Web sites that have been cached in the September 11 Web Archives (http://september11.archive.org/) In all, close to 30,000 sites were archived between September 11 and December 1 last year, providing the unique opportunity to document what Web producers did in response to 9/11. A copy of the report can be viewed and downloaded at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=69. "Please feel free to forward this email alert to colleagues, friends, or family members who might be interested in it. If you have received this message from a subscriber, you can sign up to receive your own alerts at: http://www.pewinternet.org/signup.asp" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To subscribe, send a blank message to pewinternet-on(a)pewinternet.org To unsubscribe, send a blank message to pewinternet-off(a)pewinternet.org To change your email address, send a message to pewinternet-change(a)pewinternet.org with your old address in the Subject: line To contact the list owner, send your message to pewinternet-list-owner(a)pewinternet.org http://www.pewinternet.org/ To unsubscribe, click on the following web page. http://cgi.mail-list.com/unsub.pl?ln=pewinternet&nm=wellman@chass.utoronto.… This message was launched into cyberspace to wellman(a)chass.utoronto.ca

1 0

The Role of Place in Shaping Virtual Community
by Quentin Jones 06 Sep '02

06 Sep '02

CALL FOR PARTICIPATION A CSCW 2002 WORKSHOP The Role of Place in Shaping Virtual Community AT A GLANCE What: A Workshop on Building Virtual Community Places Where: CSCW 2002, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA When: Saturday, November 16, 2002 Submission: Position paper and profile by Friday Sept 27th (any questions please contact us we are happy to work with people) Notification: Accept/Reject feedback by Monday Oct 14 Organizers: Quentin Jones, New Jersey Institute of Technology, qgjones(a)acm.org Christine Halverson, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, krys(a)us.ibm.com The Call for Participation The adoption of modern communication technologies increasingly situates interpersonal interactions virtually. This has had an enormous impact on people's social networks as community ties shift from linking people together-in-physical-places to people-to-people-wherever-they-might-be [18]. However, these changes have not lessened the importance of place, be it virtual or physical, in shaping interaction patterns and discourse. The term place means different things to different people, and this workshop will examine these differences in relation to virtual community. In particular this workshop aims to explore the myriad of ways that: * the design of virtual or hybrid spaces / places directly provides common ground for user interactions; and * communities use public interactions in virtual spaces to create shared meaning. This exploration will in turn be used to enable an examination of various aspects of virtual community development and maintenance. THEME In recent years we have moved away from the notion that the ever increasing virtualization of interpersonal communications has simply led, as Meyrowitz's [12] describes it, to a sense of placeless-ness. Instead, it is now widely accepted among computer-mediated communication researchers that cyberspace abounds with virtual places within which vibrant interactions occur [7]. Instead of focusing on the demise of many of the physical Great Good Places [13] where unrelated people relate, many have celebrated the growth in virtual places associated with community [15]. These places where virtual community members interact are referred to by a wide variety of labels including chat rooms [14], cyber-inns [4], virtual settlements [9], commons [11], and conferences [8]. The provision of such labels highlights the role of virtual places in providing context for discourse. Of course, the context of place both affects, and is affected by associated user interactions and the nature and form of the client technologies used by members to interact. Some systems are completely open to the public, such as LambdaMoo [16], others are restricted to a membership [17], or a specific task or purpose [5]. All these points highlight the importance of gaining an understanding of the role of place in shaping virtual community discourse. This task is made even more pressing by the advent of mobile client technologies that use devices such as PDA's or cell phones, and associated communication technologies such as SMS and 3G, which complicates notions of virtual community public places. This workshop aims to explore the role of place in supporting virtual community interactions. Among the questions we hope participants will take on are the following: · Is place designed? Accreted? Or renewed through interactions on some regular basis? · Is place a physical metaphor? Or expressed through issues of behavior, understanding of presence, or discourse? · How does place provide a context for your virtual community? · When community members interact with their client technology how does place impact on their interactions? · What is the interaction between the design of user interfaces and the ability of the participants to create a place for social interaction? · What theoretical constructs have been useful to you in understanding how interactions in community places have enabled people to stays tied together? A variety of disciplines are pertinent to these explorations, including architecture, sociology, linguistic and discourse analyses, and design. Each one approaches the ideas of place and common ground for interaction from a slightly different perspective, and level of detail. Other disciplines may have pertinent insights and approaches. We would like to encourage them all. Important perspectives and issues include the notions of space and place [7], common information space [1], common ground in discourse [3], discourse architecture [10], genre theory [6], and other detailed aspects of linguistics [2]. There have been a number of past community workshops, covering formation of communities, construction of infrastructures and understanding aspects of group formation and vitality. Recently there has been more emphasis on how to study and understand active communities. We would like to expand this to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms involved as they relate to place. ACTIVITIES AND GOALS The full day workshop will be divided into three sections: 1) Exploration of participants' examples of how the design of virtual place provides common ground for user interactions; 2) An examination of how communities use public interactions in virtual spaces to create shared meaning; and 3) A synthesis session where participants will explore various aspects of virtual community development and maintenance. If attendance is high we may break into subgroups for more intense discussion. If this is the case then each smaller group will report back with their key ideas. By the end of the workshop participants will have a catalog of examples of existing virtual places and an accompanying critique of their strengths and weaknesses for supporting user interactions SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS By Friday Sept 27th, submit the following (preferably electronically): Proposals should be no longer than 6 pages and should include description of the following aspects. 1) An existing place used to support community (or communities); 2) An examination of how the place/s under consideration provides common ground for user interactions; and 3) Theoretical ideas or approaches that help you understand context and social interaction, or an exploration of virtual community development and maintenance. Position papers should explain how the author's work relates to the workshop theme. We are particularly interested in seeing perspectives at a variety of levels from high and meta to micro- scales. Position papers will be reviewed by the workshop organizers and the final organization will be adapted to take into account the number expected and the range of submissions. We expect about 12-15 participants, but could expand up to 20. If size approaches the maximum we will adjust the workshop organization to spend some time broken into small groups so that the quality of the discussions remains high. We look for a wide range of participants. System architects and designers who have thought about and implemented supports for social interaction, social psychologists, linguists and sociologists who have studied online interactions, and others we may not have previously considered. Those from outside of the CSCW community should note that you are NOT required to pay the conference registration fee if you only want to attend the workshop. However, first-time attendees are most welcome, and we encourage you to look over the array of offerings on the conference program. REFERENCES 1. Bannon, L., and Bodker, S. Constructing Common Information Space. Proceedings of the Fifth ECSCW. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands , 1997. 2. Brennan, S.E. and J.O. Ohaeri. Why do electronic conversations seem less polite: the costs and benefits of hedging. in WACC '99. 1999. San Francisco, CA : ACM.. 3. Clark , H. Arenas of language use. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1992. 4. Coate, J., 1992. Innkeeping in Cyberspace, In: Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing (DIAC-92), Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, Palo Alto, CA. http://gopher.well.sf.ca.us:70/0/Community/innkeeping. 5. Erickson, T., et al. Socially Translucent Systems: Social Proxies, Persistent Conversation, and the Design of Babble. in Human Factors in Computing: The Proceedings of CHI 99. 1999. Pittsburgh, PA : ACM Press. 6. Erickson, T. Making Sense of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC): Conversations as Genres, CMC Systems as Genre Ecologies. In the Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science. January, 2000. IEEE Press. 7. Harrison, S. and P. Dourish, 1996. Re-place-ing space: The roles of place and space in collaborative systems, In: Computer Supported Collaborative Work, ACM, Cambridge, MA pp. 67-76. 8. Hiltz, S.R. and M. Turoff, 1981. The evolution of user behavior in a computerized conferencing system, Communications of the ACM, 24 (11 November): 739-751. 9. Jones Q. 1997. Virtual-communities, virtual-settlements & cyber-archaeology: A theoretical outline. J of Comp Mediated Communication 3(3). 10. Jones Q., and S. Rafaeli 2000. Time to Split, Virtually: 'Discourse Architecture' and 'Community Building' as means to Creating Vibrant Virtual Publics. Electronic Markets: The International Journal of Electronic Commerce and Business Media. 10(4) 214-223. 11. Kollock, P. and M. Smith, 1994. Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In: Computer-Mediated Communication, (Ed. S. Herring), John Benjamins, Amsterdam. 12. Meyrowitz, J., 1985. No sense of place, Oxford University Press Inc., New York. 13. Oldenburg, R., 1989. The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Community Centers, Beauty Parlors, General Stores, Bars, Hangouts, and How They Get You Through The Day., Paragon House, New York. 14. Reid, E. M., 1991. Electropolis: Communications and community on Internet Relay Chat, Honors, History, University of Melbourne. http://www.ee.mu.oz.au/papers/emr/work.html. 15. Rheingold, H., 1993. The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. 16. Schiano, D.J. and S. White. The first noble truth of CyberSpace: People are People (even when they MOO). in CHI 98. 1998. Los Angeles CA : ACM. 17. Schlager, M. and P. Schank. TAPPED IN: A New On-line Teacher Community Concept for the Next Generation of Internet Technology. in CSCL '97, The Second International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. 1997. Toronto : ACM. 18. Wellman, B., "Physical Place and Cyber Place: The Rise of Personalized Networking" International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 25, 2 (2001): 227-52. ORGANIZERS Christine Halverson is a researcher at IBM Research. She is involved with the development and analysis of systems to help work groups interact collaboratively over networks. Her analytic approaches have included visualizations, linguistic analysis, online participation and observations among others. Her research group has designed and deployed a number of online systems including BABBLE & Loops. http://www.research.ibm.com/SocialComputing/ Quentin (Gad) Jones is an Assistant Professor at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. Prior to his current position, Quentin was a researcher at AT&T labs research, New Jersey . Before living in the United States he was a doctoral student in Information Systems at Hebrew and Haifa Universities Israel. Quentin research focus is on understanding mass interaction ecologies that result in thriving virtual communities. His current community projects include ContactMap, and GeoMemory. RELATED PAST WORKSHOPS * - Erickson T., Herring S., Sack W., Discourse Architectures: The Design and Analysis of Computer-Mediated Conversation. CHI 2002. * - Erickson T., and Herring S., "Persistent Conversation" workshops at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) from 1999-2002. * - Farnham S., Smith M., et. al. Integrating Diverse Research and Development Approaches to the Construction of Social Cyberspaces. CHI 2001. * - Bruckman A., Erickson T., et. al. Dealing with Community Data, CSCW 2000. * - Muller M., and Friedman J., Electronic Communities: Places and Spaces, Contents and Boundaries. CHI 2000. * - Barbesino et. al. Designing Across Borders: The Community Design of Community Networks. CSCW 1998. * - Toomey L., Tang J., Adams L., and Gloria Mark Designing Virtual Communities for Work. CSCW 1998. * - Bruckman A., Erickson T., et. al. Workshop on Research Issues in the Design of Online Communities. CHI 1999.

2 1

AoIR 2004 & 2005 - Call For Hosts
by Steve Jones 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

CALL FOR HOSTS CONFERENCES of the ASSOCIATION OF INTERNET RESEARCHERS (2004 and 2005) Association Web site: http://aoir.org The Association of Internet Researchers (A.(o).I.R.) invites applications from sites willing to host the association's annual conference, held each year in September/October. In keeping with the association's international membership and orientation applicants from outside the U.S. are particularly encouraged to submit proposals. Sites are being sought for the 2004 and 2005 conferences. The current and previous conference web sites are linked from http://aoir.org FORMAT OF PROPOSALS All proposals should be submitted via e-mail to: sjones(a)uic.edu Proposals will be evaluated by the AoIR executive committee. Please answer all questions below in the format in which they are presented. Applications may be of any length but should be as complete as possible. The association's executive committee may ask for clarification and/or additional information. Feel free to include information and details yourself. DEADLINE First preference for 2004 sites will be given to proposals received by January 31, but all proposals will be considered until a suitable site is found. Members of the AoIR executive committee will be available at the AoIR 2002 conference in Maastricht (October 13 - 16) to meet with those intending to submit a proposal, and will be available via email at any time to answer questions. QUESTIONNAIRE Please include answers to the questions below in the site proposal: 1. What is your location's accessibility? Is it convenient for those travelling from points around the world? Is there a major airport nearby (how distant is it)? Describe the specific site (i.e. building(s)) in which the conference would be held. What number of rooms are available and what are their capacities? What technological support is available in those rooms (e.g. ethernet, projectors, etc)? Please provide indication that these rooms are actually available during the dates you propose for the conference. What is your site's maximum capacity? Has there been previous conferences at your site? If so, please list a few examples. Do you have references or reviews of those previous conferences? If so, please provide them. 2. What kind of support will your site provide? Is there a commitment for funds for the conference? If so, to what level of funding is the commitment? Is the commitment firm (evidence of commitment letters, verbal agreements, etc., should be provided)? Are there conference coordinating agencies available on whom you could draw to help manage registration and the events? 3. Is the site affordable? Will you be able to provide quality accommodations at reasonable cost? Please give an estimate of the cost of hotel rooms and meals. Provide indication that adequate hotel rooms are actually available during the proposed conference dates. How many participants will your site/hotels be able to accommodate? What is the state of local transportation at the conference site? 4. Are there special attractions, tours, locations, at which dinners/receptions might be held, or that attendees might like to visit? 5. Is there opportunity for partnerships and sponsorships that your site can uniquely provide? Please list and explain. 6. Is there a specific year for which you are proposing your site? If not chosen for next year, would your site be willing to host the conference in a subsequent year? Are there specific dates you would like to propose (typically the conference runs three full days)? 7. Is there a person you can identify as a "local host/liaison" who will serve on the local conference committee and liason with aoir? do you have a representative or set of representatives that you would like to put on the AoIR program committee? Have they had experience managing conferences before or are there people immediately available that can guide and assist them? Do you have someone in mind in AoIR from another location than the hosting location that you would like to have Chair the conference? 8. Have you read the AoIR conference guidelines? Are there any exceptions to those guidelines that are desired for you to be able to host the conference in the way that you would like? 9. Are there any special ways that your institution furthers the interdisciplinary, international nature of the Association of Internet Researchers?

1 0

In Greece, use a Game Boy, go to jail
by jeremy hunsinger 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

this seems a bit draconian to me... In Greece, use a Game Boy, go to jail By Matt Loney and Rupert Goodwins Staff Writers, CNET News.com September 3, 2002, 11:18 AM PT In Greece, playing a shoot-'em-up video game could land you in jail. The Greek government has banned all electronic games across the country, including those that run on home computers, on Game Boy-style portable consoles, and on mobile phones. Thousands of tourists in Greece are unknowingly facing heavy fines or long terms in prison for owning mobile phones or portable video games. Greek Law Number 3037, enacted at the end of July, explicitly forbids electronic games with "electronic mechanisms and software" from public and private places, and people have already been fined tens of thousands of dollars for playing or owning games http://news.com.com/2100-1040-956357.html jeremy hunsinger jhuns(a)vt.edu on the ibook www.cddc.vt.edu www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy www.dromocracy.com () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\ - against microsoft attachments

1 0

RE: [Air-l] standards for web sites?
by Rachel Harris 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

Hi Kate I'm not sure about standards for evaluating sites, but the following provides a comprehensive list of criteria: scope, content, purpose, reviews, workability, cost - each further broken down. The paper also reviews others' views on evaluation, so provides a good starting point at least. Smith, Alastair G. "Testing the Surf: Criteria for Evaluating Internet Information Resources." The Public-Access Computer Systems Review 8, no. 3 (1997). Available at: http://info.lib.uh.edu/pr/v8/n3/smit8n3.html Kind regards Rachel ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dr Rachel A Harris Scottish Centre for Research into On-Line Learning and Assessment University of Glasgow Florentine House 53 Hillhead Street Glasgow, G12 8QQ 0141 330 2878 r.harris(a)udcf.gla.ac.uk www.scrolla.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: air-l-admin(a)aoir.org [mailto:air-l-admin@aoir.org]On Behalf Of Kate Williams Sent: 30 August 2002 17:10 To: air-l(a)aoir.org Subject: [Air-l] standards for web sites? Hello AOIR, For a colleague's project involving African American related websites: Have any standards for evaluating websites have been set or even outlined? For instance, perhaps a set of measures such as stability/permanence, depth, audience, host, etc. URLs for good African American related websites would be welcome too. thank you, kate williams katewill(a)umich.edu http://www.umich.edu/~katewill/ _______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l(a)aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l

1 0

new reviews in cyberculture studies (september 2002)
by david silver 05 Sep '02

05 Sep '02

AirFolk, (Newsflash: RCCS will launch its redesign within two weeks ...) New book reviews for September 2002 (found at http://www.com.washington.edu/rccs/books/) include: Thomas Swiss, editor, Unspun: Key Concepts for Understanding the World Wide Web. New York University Press, 2000. Reviewed by Kate O'Riordan with a response from Thom Swiss. Bob Johnstone, We Were Burning: Japanese Entrepreneurs and the Forging of the Electronic Age. Basic Books, 1999. Reviewed by Shane Butterfield. If you or your colleagues are interested in reviewing books for RCCS, contact us directly at <dsilver(a)u.washington.edu>. As always, please feel free to forward this message. david silver http://faculty.washington.edu/dsilver To SUBSCRIBE to cyberculture-announce, a low volume announcement list for RCCS events and updates, email: listproc(a)u.washington.edu; No subject is needed. In the body, type: subscribe cyberculture-announce

1 0