I wonder... we talk about Web 2.0, and the rise of virtual communities and social networking. But how are these communities, based on interaction and collaboration, different from the ones that existed 50 years ago, offline? What I mean is: church groups, girls scouts, sports teams... aren't they all communities?? So what has changed?

Well it is obvious, first of all, that the social networks have evolved into being more accessible. They have extended geographically to not just include your neighbor or your girl scout friends, but to involve people far away, and even people you have never met.

The second thing comes from the writable Web. People now congregate online to share and write content of all sorts, in an effort to bypass the conventional distribution channels...

What else?

50 years is such a long time. I'm only 30ish....

So much going on. 

The following comments are all based on the ideal world where everyone has and can afford access to the web, are literate and have a need for this kind of interaction. In those instances it offers a phenomenal reach of knowledge and different types of friendship.

It has changed the nature of how we work. I am a journalist and think it has made my job easier and is also raising the standards of our work. Content is much more compelling now - or certainly has the potential to be. 

I am doing the same job here in Australia as I was doing in The Netherlands. That is, I began writing copy for an Australian company while living overseas. What freedom.

I think that the 'traditional' communities you outlined bring people together with similar interests in the first instance. Eg. You end up at scouts because you are interested. You might then develop some friendships within that community further based  on other shared interests, ideals etc...

I have found that social networking throws me into contact with people I would not necessarily meet or be attracted to in the physical world. When I say attracted I mean people who I think I may have something in common with. There are obvious markers for this in the real world. Mums, writing colleagues, people close geographically, people I went to school with etc... On the web I have friendships with a wonderful range of people. Age, socioeconomic stuff, jobs, geography etc... are less relevant. On Tangler it comes down to morals, interests and beliefs I think. Well, certainly more than it does in the physical world. I find that refreshing.

It can also be confronting which I quite like. Confronting because its almost like a confessional. You have to take a stand when you post remarks. Think about where you stand on issues...

I find that the biggest difference between traditional communities (the ones of 50 years ago) and the web 2.0 communities is the removal of barriers.  If I was at a pub and i heard 3 people standing in a circle talking about virtual communitites, chances are I wouldnt chime in with my 2 cents, and if i did, chances are you would be wondering how long its going to take before I try to convince you to come to an Amway meeting, start chatting up your girlfriend, etc. 

The best example of this is the rise of online dating.  The internet alows a certain level on anonymity and thus removes the approach anxiety for many people that would ordinarily be scared to strike up a conversation with a stranger.  

P.S - I'm not part of Amway 

I agree with both of you. I thing Web 2.0 has had tremendous impact on the way we interact with people, and on the type of people that we interact with. And of course, as you said, it makes it so much easier to approach a total stranger, for dating, for conversation, debates, etc...

I don't know about the accruacy of this quote I just came across earlier this evening...... even with the rapid growth of online activity it seems unbelievable to me:

"1 of every 8 couples married in the U.S. last year met online"

Searching for confirmation of the above quote (so far unsuccessful) , I came across the following - (2006 ):

"The growing trend for people to meet over the internet is having a profound effect on Australian marriages, with cyber romances playing a role in thousands of break-ups" ....

"New university research shows as many as 50 per cent of people dabbling in online romances are already in relationships and many are having multiple affairs."

Removal of barriers indeed !

I love the term "dabbling in online romances" it makes it sound so much nicer than "cheating on your partner" 

Yeah.... a dabble has never hurt anyone has it?

Dabble is such a non-committal, harmless word!

I like to meet people after I have interacted with them online. They never look like what I expect.

A bit like the ole days when you would see your favourite radio presenter in the flesh and they were so unlike what you expected!

hehehe yeah! Excellent point abt the radio presenters

Mine was Gary Shannon, circa 1987. Black hair, not blonde. Short, not tall....