This very same point might well be made in the references mentioned, but to add to the interesting discussion here, I've always thought "auditor" a more appropriate substitute for "lurker," in the same sense as one who "audits" classes. The slipperiness in "lurker" (at least for listservs) seems to be the conflation of two things: "participation" (as in speaking/posting) and "invisibility" (as in anonymity). IMHO the term "lurker" implies not just silence but anonymity or the option of some degree of concealment. A student who "audits" a class can't be very anonymous, but (in some strict sense) is expected to be more of a listener than a speaker (compared to the norm). "Speaking" or the more active sorts of participation are usually primarily the decision of individual members, but the level of "anonymity" afforded them is the product of decisions by both members AND list moderators/owners. AIR-L, for example, is configured so that the subscriber list is only accessible to list moderators and owners; members cannot know who other members are (or more precisely what their email addresses are) unless they post that information or otherwise provide their consent. Listservs where that information is also accessible to members lean more in the direction of enabling "auditing" (though even there, members can retain anonymity via email aliases and the like). The "negative" connotations of "lurker" have both to do with passivity or a perceived lack of community commitment (via "participation") AND with anonymity or concealment. Both models (communities that enable "lurking" or "auditing") offer distinct advantages, obviously. --Lane DeNicola Message: 16 Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 16:11:57 +0200 From: Ulf-Dietrich Reips <ureips@genpsy.unizh.ch> Subject: Re: [Air-l] we need a better word than lurking To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org, aoir list <air-l@aoir.org> Message-ID: <p06230931c26633dfa757@[10.0.1.3]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Hi Barry, all, you might be interested in the following two works: Stegbauer, C. & Rausch, A. (2002). Lurkers in mailing lists. In B. Batinic, U.-D. Reips, & M. Bosnjak (Eds.), Online Social Sciences (pp. 263-274). Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber. Bosnjak, M. (2001). Participation in non-restricted web surveys: A typology and explanatory model for item non- response. In U.-D. Reips & M. Bosnjak (Eds.), Dimensions of Internet Science (pp. 193-208). Lengerich: Pabst. While the first one is from the area of social network theory, the second one proposes a highly useful typology of non-responders in online research. In Bosnjak's view, lurkers are just one of seven types. While created for online research, the typology seems useful for other purposes as well. Best --u -- Lane DeNicola Doctoral Candidate | Dept. of Science & Technology Studies Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute http://www.nacresky.com/lad Tried the Science Studies Search Engine? <http://www.nacresky.com/ssse>