J.A.

Kirkcaldy, University of Bradford

Exploring the use of the term community amongst users of an Internet discussion
board

Introduction

Studies into social media (Donath 2002; Dodge & Kitchin 2001) or computer mediated
communication (Yates, 2001) have focused on the notion of disembedded communities,
also referred to as cyber or virtual online communities and groups, (Stone, 1991;
Rheingold, 1993; McLaughlin et al 1995; Fernback, 1999; Wellman and Guila, 1999,
Kanayama, 2003;). Despite the label virtual sometimes informing heuristically the
assertions of critics, (Robins, 1995; Sardar, 1995) the majority of empirical studies, argue
Dodge and Kitchin (2001), indicate that there are many online communities which are
rich in their diversity, (Dodge and Kitchin, 2001: 55). This paper elides such a debate to
explore the use of the term community by users of a set of Internet discussion boards.

Through use of a pilot study this paper blends two approaches to the study of electronic
data and online groups evident in previous research. The first section of this paper
outlines such approaches and considers how they can be adapted to study a discussion
board and its participants. Such a review also serves, first, to generate a research question
to loosely structure the explorative aim of the pilot studyto what extent are those using
the term community in repertoires associated with power also m-core members at given
values of m? And second to indicate a methodology that engages with such a question.

Section two opens with an overview1 of a methodology designed and used to engage with
the research question and explorative goals. It argues that given the problem of
authenticity and the quality and scope of electronic data, a purely partly automated
covert observational approach is fraught with difficulties and deploys an offline
approach, namely conducting a traditional place based ethnography, (Hammersley &
Atkinson, 1995) to attempt to compensate the weaknesses in one approach with the
strengths of another, (Sudweeks & Simoff, 1999).
 2

Section One: Literature review

Discussion boards are one digital or electronic environment amongst others. To a user
they are dynamic database driven web pages allowing user generation of content.
Collectively termed the social media of cyberspace, (Donath 2002; Dodge and Kitchin
2001) or alternatively computer mediated communication (Yates, 2001), discussion
boards can be placed in a typology of social media based on the two fold polarities;
synchronous and asynchronous, and the number of people the media is conducive to i.e.
one-to-one or one-to-many, (Yates, 2001; Dodge & Kitchin, 2001).

Internet discussion boards are similar to mailing lists, list serves, and Usenet and tend to
be conducive to one-to-many communication. Second they are asynchronous, in that
there is a delay between sending a communication and receiving a reply. Internet
discussion boards also referred to as bulletin boards, web forums and a variety of other
terms, differ from Usenet in terms of their functionality for greater symbolic expression
through incorporation of digital images and symbolic sets, which move beyond the text
based social media of mailing lists and older forms of Usenet2.

Research concerning online groups and communities has focused on synchronous

communication (for example Rhiengold, 1993; Reid, 1991, 1999; Tuckle 1995; Vigas &
Donath, 1999; Cooper & Harrison, 2001; Yates, 2001). In comparison few have studied
asynchronous communication (Donath et al, 1999, 2002; Sack, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002;
Kanayama, 2003). Some have sought to investigate language use online, for example
Reid, (1991) studied IRC users use of creative language to construct a form of
community and Yates (2001), has investigated how users construct identities on-line?
(Yates, 2001: 115).

Yates used concordance software to count the occurrences of different pronouns in users
discourse, to generate statistics that compare the relative occurrence of identity markers
between six media types, associating synchronous social media with the highest
occurrence of identity markers (Yates, 2001: 117-120). Yates also develops a set of key
 3

word in context analyses (KWIC) and uses computer assisted qualitative data analysis
software (CAQDAS) to conduct a content analysis that aids a careful reading of the text
based interactions. This enabled Yates to develop a coding scheme that categorizes the
occurrence of I am/Im present in the data, that seemed to reflect their role or purpose
in the interaction, (Yates, 2001: 127).

Where Yates and others focused on synchronous social media Adams (1997, 1998), has
previously commented on language use in cyberspace more generally. Arguing that
interaction is grounded through the use of geographic metaphors [...] nouns, such as
rooms, lobbies, highway, frontier, cafes; and verbs such as surf, inhabit, build, enter,
(Adams, 1997 c.f. Dodge & Kitchin 2001). Few have studied how users create a sense of
place and territoriality through language use online and none of those cited above have
focused on the term community in its usage amongst discussion board participants.

Tepper (1997) has studied asynchronous social media, that, although not specifically
concerned with language use, is insightful in terms of exposing the theoretical orientation
towards community adopted in this paper, particularly in-light of Yates, (2001) focus on
pronouns and use of CAQDAS. Tepper (1997) describes how social boundaries between
insiders and outsiders in online groups appears to be maintained through sub-cultural
games (strategies of inclusion and exclusion) and details that in some [...] cases, the sub-
cultural boundaries are maintained by in-jokes, particularized lexicon sets [...] and other
games, (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001: 60).

This paper suggests such other games include Wittgensteins notion of a language
game. For example when ethnomethodologists, [...] have drawn on Wittgenstein, they
have often drawn on this practical, local, specific approach to language (Lynch, 1997),
(Potter, 2001: 41). Others taking such an approach to language use also cite the work
Austin (1962) to suggest a concern with the discourse in which a term is worked up to
and the text(s) it is followed by, as a unit of analysis, (Potter and Wetherell, 1987). Potter
and Wetherell (1987), Billig, (2001) and others tentatively term such a loose unit for
analysis the repertoire and identify those in which community is embedded, (Potter and
 4

Wetherell, 1987; Potter & Reicher, 1987; Halliday and Potter, 1987). The focus is on the
discourse in which the term is embedded and assessing the repertoires function and
action orientation. There is a focus on availability in repertoire use across actors and
occasions and consideration of the context in which the discourse is situated.

In previous studies repertoires with community embedded were identified in accounts of

a set of city riots, (Potter and Wetherell, 1987; Potter & Reicher, 1987; Halliday and
Potter, 1987). They discovered, that in this instance there were [...] features bound to the
category community [that provided] certain actions with legitimacy, (Potter and
Wetherell, 1987: 137). How this is worked up to in a text has been characterized by Potter
and Edwards (1993) as a warranting technique, sometimes accompanied by the speaker
positioning themselves into a derivative category (or an available subject position) such
as community leader to invoke particular entitlements to knowledge, (Potter &
Edwards 1993). In other words the speaker attempts to position themselves as operating
in a specific capacity or social role associated with power.

Drawing upon Goffmans notion of footing (1981) and Austins (1962), possible features
that establish capacity include pronoun use. For example changes from first person
singular to first person plural (I to we) in a users discourse to establish a capacity in
which they are communicating, followed by use of second and third person pronouns
you your and they them to consolidate the capacity or role. Together in fluctuation
the author can be theorized as also establishing subject positions for the addressed (Davis
& Harr, 1990), and inferring sets of relationships with those whom the speaker is
interacting.

Combined with use of the term community, fluctuations in pronoun use can serve to
include and exclude others. For example we, us, our, ours to include, warrant and
legitimize. And you, your, yours, they, them, theirs to exclude and when
constructed negatively to belittle. They can be a show of power if pulled off, which is in
part dependent on the response(s) of the other speaker(s), invoking participants in
relations with each other.
 5

In contrast to this discourse analytical approach to identifying social relations and users
associated with power, are a set of other approaches that extend beyond [...] to try and
map them, (Dodge & Kitchin 2001: 145). Specifically visualize such relations through
the node arc metaphor in social network analysis, (Wellman & Guila 1999). Sack (2000a,
2000b, 2000c, 2000d) is one researcher to adopt network approach combining insights
from linguistics and network analysis. Further he has applied this to the study of Usenet
posts and groups, developing software to automate aspects of the data collection,
manipulation and analysis to study what he terms Very Large Scale Conversations
(VLSC).

Commenting on the sociograms drawn and displayed through his software, Sack argues
that one useful result is that, []the social network display acts both as a filter for
spammers and a means to identify some of the main players in a discussion, (Sack,
2001a). In other words, hubs in the social network whose members [...] are the virtual
moderators of a sort for the newsgroup even though the group depicted has no
moderators3, (sack, 2000a: 77).

Sociograms are a formal method to visualize relational data. The particular graphing
procedures used by Sack pushes those participants who are closely connected to the
middle of the graph. In their most basic form, a sociogram comprises of dots or nodes
connected by a line, referred to as a tie, edge or arc, depending on the context of the data.
In Sacks example,
the nodes in the network represent people -- i.e., participants in the online
discussion -- and the links represent reciprocating quotations and/or responses,
(Sack, 2000d: 3).
The simplest network to compute would ignore the quotations or citations, in favor of
computing only the contact structure, that is, [] if participant A responds to a message
posted by participant B then a link can be drawn between A and B, (Sack, 2000d: 76).

Such an approach has been termed threading, (Boyd et al 2002; Sack, 2000) and closely
resembles the approach adopted by this paper, though unlike Donath et al (1999) this
 6

paper uses a sociogram to bring structure to the datas diagrammatic expressions. This is
best demonstrated through use of example that also serves to introduce basic network
theory to those who have not encountered it before.

The discussion boards structure can be represented in a tree diagram (Fig 1.0). Here the
first block represents the total discussion board and the three other blocks attached, each
room or sub-forum through which the conversation ensues.

Fig. 1.0 Fig 1.1 Fig. 1.2

Fig. 1.3

Figure 1.1 shows the forums a little later with Bob posting a topic for discussion in room
three followed by Rita and Sue posting replies and weaving the thread. Figure 1.1 can
be represented as a sociogram where the nodes represent actors and the presence of a tie
between a pair of actors drawn if they are weaving the same thread. This is displayed in
figure 1.2. Figure 1.3 displays the sociogram as expressed in an actor by actor matrix
(read from rows to columns).
 7

Later in this temporal sequence Bob posts another topic for discussion. As figure 1.4
shows only Sue responds, and this is represented in the sociogram, figure 1.5, by valuing
the tie between Bob and Sue with the number of times they have taken part in the
weaving of a thread. The thickness of the line can also be used to represent this value and
can be expressed in an actor by actor matrix (Fig 1.6).

Fig. 1.4 Fig. 1.5

Fig. 1.6

Figure 1.6 represents a form in which the data can be imported into the network analysis
software suite UCINET6 and a sociogram graphed with NetDraw available with the
UCINET6 software suite. Similar to Sack the graphing procedures used to generate the
sociograms presented in this paper push participants who are more closely connected
towards the center of the graph4.
 8

In addition to pushing actors closer together a second way to represent this idea and
identify a core set of users, that is identifying hubs or virtual moderators (Sack, 2000),
through NetDraw, would be to select data over a particular time frame and use
Seidmans idea of the core collapse sequence [extended] to m-cores, (Scott, 1991: 116),
An m-core can be defined as a maximal sub-graph in which each line has a
multiplicity greater than or equal to m. An m-core is a chain of points connected
by lines of the specified multiplicity, (Scott, 1991: 116).
In the context of this paper multiplicity refers to the number of times that a given set of
actors are observed to have taken part in weaving the same topic thread. To use the
previous example (Fig. 1.4) when m is equal to one (Figure 1.7) all actors connected by a
tie of a value of one or greater will be displayed. When m is equal to two only actors
connected with ties of a value of two and above will be displayed (Figure 1.8).

Fig. 1.7 Fig 1.8

Netdraw comes equipped with a tool that allows us to perform such an analysis, where in
effect, lines [and actors are] progressively removed as the value of m is increased,
(Scott, 1991: 116).

The theoretical orientation to the use of the term community deployed in this paper is one
bound up with power, particularly in the case of users legitimizing accounts of their
social worlds and acts taken to change that world. As Bourdieu comments such accounts
and representations are the,
[...] stakes par excellence of the political struggle, a struggle which is inseparably
theoretical and practical, over the power of preserving or transforming the social
 9

world by preserving or transforming the categories of perception of that world,

(Bourdieu, 1991: 117).
In identifying repertoires that draw use to the term community bound with the features
discussed above, it is theoretically possible to identify users occupying a social role or
speaking from particular capacities that are associated with power. Given that m-cores
have been conceptualized as helpful in identifying a discussion groups moderators
and/or community leaders (Sack 2000) both approaches thematically coincide and a
research question emerges, to what extent are those using the term community in
repertoires associated with power also m-core members at given values of m?
 1

Section Two: The Pilot Study

As Scott (1991) notes the mass of data and number processes required to conduct even a
simple network analysis and graph the network often requires the use of a computer to
automate parts of the process. The desire to automate is given greater impetus given the
need to conduct longitudinal studies and study the wider network, hence process vast
amounts of data. Interestingly Sack (2000) Donath et al (1999) and others (Yan & Seo
2003) automate, to varying degrees, the research process. The method used in this paper
inherently automates parts of the research process by virtue of graphing relational data. It
also partly automates generation of the actor by actor matrix containing the relational
data that is required to generate the sociogram and perform a core collapse sequence.

The data used in the analysis is electronic, in the form of a downloadable web page that
contains the text and symbolically based interaction and communication between
participants. Given access to the web based discussion boards, the web pages can be
downloaded automatically through using a web spider. The one used in this paper was
called HTTrack. The sample used in this paper was publicly available and comprised of
approximately 670 threads (of varying numbers of posts downloaded as 1937 HTML
documents) generated by approximately 169 users out of approximately 350 registered
users. The sample represents a fraction of the total number of topic threads generated by
users of the discussion board and represents a distinct period in the life of the online
group.

This author generated this sample at an early stage as part of testing the limitations of
HTTrack, and generated a second live sample to be used in any future study. The second
sample was maintained by using HTTrack periodically to download new topic threads
generated by users. This author made a mistake when performing such an update routine
which resulted in this second archive5 being overwritten.

One key software package used in this paper was NUDIST 6 (N6) which is primarily
designed for qualitative data analysis. The process which generates the actor by thread
 1

matrix relies on one of the two sorts of crosstabulations available through Nudist, the
matrix sort. Briefly such an approach includes the procedures involved in formatting and
applying a first layer of coding to the down loaded web pages, required to import the data
and order it into a specific structure6 in Nudist.

Nudist was also used to perform key word in context analyses to identify the threads
containing the term community and the actors deploying such a term. Threads could be
coded with reference to the presence and absence of the features identified earlier and
collated into repertoires that seemed to reflect their role or purpose in the interaction,
(Yates, 2001). A step by step guide to the procedures used in this second analysis is
presented in the appendix and relies on structuring the coded data through use of node
trees.

Both approaches would engage with the research question and as a method, would
indicate a covert observational approach to studying this online setting, the electronic
data gathered and the users who have generated it. As a result a number of problems
begin to emerge. Most of the methods texts regarding Internet research acknowledge the
problem of authenticity, al be it in differing ways and this is related to the quality and
scope of the data (Jones, 1999; Hine, 2000; Dodge and Kitchin, 2001; Bryman, 2004).

In the context of this paper it is not a problem of associating a username with the
symbolic set, as the username is a constituent of such a symbolic set. Nor is it merely the
case of identifying the computers associated with the deployment of such a symbolic set,
but rather associating the human that has generated and deployed such a set through such
a computer. This is compounded by the observation that users will reproduce multiple
online handles or nicknames from different computers and be in the process of identity
play and identity theft (Hine, 2000; Dodge & Kitchin, 2001). This raises a number
problems regarding the ability to verify that a post was made by a particular human and
that the username can be associated with a single node, particularly given that the text
based posts are the only data that is used.
 1

As a solution this pilot study resorted to offline approaches, namely conducting a more
traditional place based ethnography. This authors role as an ethnographer emerged from
this offline setting which can be characterized as shared student accommodation
comprising of this author and two ex-students. Both persons were administrators of the
discussion boards studied in this paper and rented the hardware required to maintain the
discussion boards from one of the many commercial service providers. The cohabitation
lasted for approximately a year though the role of this author as ethnographer emerged in
the latter months.

The relationship between this author as ethnographer to the two administrators can be
characterized as an overt observer and participant, with full knowledge of the papers
construction and the study disclosed to these two people. This author also agreed to
maintain the anonymity, to a certain degree, of those studied by omitting the names of the
users from the data, findings and extracts presented in this paper. Consent has not yet
been sort for using the threads and electronic data that these people have generated and
made publicly available. The role of this author is as both covert observer, with regards to
the majority of the users studied and overt participant and observer with regards to the
two individuals lived with. Such roles dynamically arose as the pilot study continued and
remains subject to change in the future, (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995).

In one sense there are two settings studied, loosely divided into the online and the offline.
The online data gathered would be complimented by the offline data, which was
generated through conversation with the two administrators, structured by open as well as
closed questions. The aim was to generate insider accounts, conduct follow up interviews,
consult with those being studied to clarify interpretations and add context to the online
data, as well as establish the authenticity of some of the data.

Early on it became apparent that the set of discussion boards also included a set of
closed hidden rooms. By closed they were only accessible and visible to be read by
those granted a particular status by the administrators. By hidden the existence of closed
rooms could also be unknown to the other users and the researcher deploying the covert
 1

observer approach outlined above. No link to the rooms is presented to the user without
the privileges, in contrast to the user granted privileges that can see the link to the closed
rooms. The closed rooms, which were reserved for those granted moderator status, were
deemed private by both the administrators and some of the moderators and this in part
informs the use of data publicly available.

The discussion boards included the capacity for private messaging systems and serviced
users of a gaming environment, complimented with other social media such as IRC.
Collectively such environments were referred to, in the word of one of the administrators
as Sanguine7,
a gaming community that aims to provide an open and friendly place for all to
come and play games. We aim to be flexible and provide the games the
community wants, and also provide new games for everybody to try with old
friends
Users frequented other gaming environments of a similar genre to those associated with
Sanguine. The data set represents a period of decline and conflict at Sanguine. Sanguine
no longer exists though some of those having used such environments still interact and
communicate with each other, playing in environments owned by others.

The results of the partly automated analysis presented below will also draw resource to
the insider accounts generated in face-to-face conversation with the two administrators to
add context to the small sample of online data studied and assess its authenticity. Just as
this pilot study blends two analytical approaches it also attempts to blend both the
online and offline settings in terms of expanding the quality and scope of the former to
attempt to offset the associated weaknesses with the strengths of the latter (Sudweeks &
Simoff, 1999). However this is not to say that such approaches are not unproblematic.
 1

Findings

Only 22 out of the 169 actors in the data set were identified using community in one or
more threads in the context of referring to their online group. Figure 2.0 shows such users
relative to the wider network data. All twenty two actors are present when m is equal to
nine, or approximately 5% of mmax. Fig 2.1 displays the sociogram where all actors are
connected by ties of a value of nine or greater8. The yellow nodes represent users that
have used community and the red those that have not.

Fig. 2.0 Fig. 2.1

Only 22 threads in the data set could be identified as containing the term community and
only two actors identified as using community in the sense outlined earlier. As shown in
figure 2.2 both actors using the term community in this sense have been coloured green
and identified as A and B. B on one occasion and A on several occasions9.
 1

As Fig. 2.2 shows A and B were both members of the core where m is equal to sixty-four
(38% of mmax). In such a core eighty percent of all members had used the term
community when referring to their group.

Fig. 2.2 Fig. 2.3

The precise value of m chosen in figure 2.2 was one less than the value at which user B
would be removed. Figure 2.3 shows this core (Fig. 2.2) relative to the wider network in
figure 2.1. Core members who have not used the term community are indicated as white
nodes.

The majority of instances of community were identified in only three threads and all three
threads show evidence of conflict between participants, several of whom are members of
the m core displayed in figure 2.2. As displayed in figure 2.4 conflict was particularly
acute between members using the term community at a core where m is equal to sixty
four (38%).
 1

Fig 2.4

Here persons E, F and G are all members of smaller gaming groups known as a clans10,
some having been granted moderator privileges by person A. The conflicts spilled11
from the closed forum and other environments resulting in some of the users having
their privileges removed by person A and excluded from the closed forum. The lines
between members in conflict and being excluded are highlighted in red.

Person A is graphed as a central actor connected to all other actors forming a star or
hub and spokes a position that within the basic metaphors of network analysis is,
depending on the context of the data, associated with power12, (Scott, 1991; Degene and
Forse, 1999, Hanneman 2001). Person A is one of the two administrators, in particular the
one who rented the hardware to maintain the discussion boards and other social media
environments. Correspondingly person A had a number of privileges and powers
 1

associated with being a leaseholder through renting the computer hardware to maintain
such social media and gaming environments.
Discussion and conclusions

The findings suggest that in this data set those persons (A and B) using particular
repertoires containing the term community that have been associated as used by
community leaders and bound up with relations of power, also occupy network
positions that are associated with power (A in an ideal sense and B when m is equal to
sixty four (38%)). In this data set the use of particular repertoires are limited to those who
hold a particular capacity within the group, (Austin, 1962) particularly person A as an
administrator. Similar to Potter et al, it is in the context of conflict and power that we
can note a high occurrence of the term community in our data set.

The quality of the electronic data is poor and the sample is not representative of the total
number of threads, with the closed forum data excluded and only a partial sample of
publicly accessible data studied. However the distinction between the public and private
data is informative, in particular that person A viewed it as such and that it was also
closed and not visible nor accessible by most users, reserved for those granted a
particular status, that of a moderator. Some of the conflict included the exclusion of users
from such a reserved place that is a change in the groups hierarchy.

It is hoped that the pilot study in exploring language use, inclusion and exclusion and
positions of power outlines a methodology to be developed and applied elsewhere that
begins to [...] deconstruct the complex power geometries that have started to emerge
online , (Dodge & Kitchin 2001: 214), and engages with , [...] how different
communal online spaces are governed and regulated and the strategies of resistance
adopted by users, (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001: 214) Further that it attempts to move beyond
though does not exclude ethnographic insights, to attempt to visualize and map a socio-
space with resource to data collected from publicly accessible social media environments
(Dodge & Kitchin, 2001).
 1

The use of qualitative data analysis to generate relational data has a number of potentials
and prompts asking whether we can refine the identification of discursive practices,
features and patterns in users communications to better identify relational data, conflict,
relations of power and influence, and practices that reproduce and maintain the
boundaries of group(s). Can we bind threads, generated over a given time frame, together
to form relational strings? To what extent can this process be automated given the vast
amounts of data and the desire to generate computer visualizations?

The automation of the research process is also prompted by desires to conduct wider area
network studies that move beyond and extend from analysis of micro levels, such as
outlined in the pilot study. This sets the imagination in motion. For example the study of
the ideological and cultural references bound up with strategies of inclusion and
exclusion, (Dodge & Kitchin, 2001), studied at the micro level across the wider network
and many groups, when mapped, may constitute a study of broader ideological currents
online. In this sense paraphrasing, tentatively and purposefully, Simmel perhaps we can
conclude that, we can no longer take to be unimportant consideration of the delicate,
invisible threads that are woven between one person and another, (Simmel, 1907: 1035
c.f. Frisby, 1999).

This paper, it is hoped tempers such an imagination, suggesting that such macro (or
aggregated micro and meso) studies will be fraught with difficulties if the micro and
meso levels are nor fully understood and studied in-depth, with the authenticity, quality
and scope of the data assured to the best of ones ability. This paper has not considered
the variety of other metaphors and synonyms used to refer to and generate a sense of this
place. Further it only explored a few uses of the term community and the contexts in
which it was embeddedprimarily power and conflict. It disregarded instances of
cohesive predicates bound with the use of the term community, (Potter and Wetherell,
1987) which all through absent from the sample used, marked a more peaceful period
where users had come together to generate symbolic sets to express the identity of the
discussion boards, associated environments and some of the users themselves.
 1

Given these issues the study using this data set can remain only a pilot, explorative in
intent and as an ethnography adaptive if not virtual, (Hine, 2000), positioning itself
methodologically and theoretically towards future studies. A great deal of focused study
is still required to understand how users construct a sense of place, and develop a
territoriality and sense of ownership of such places, not only through the language they
deploy in conversations but the webs of relationships they weave and the unique
symbolic sets that emerge. Such a concern is intimately related with the wider study of
online groups, which as a field of study lacks longitudinal research focusing on the life
cycles of online groups dynamically and their relationship with the wider network and
other groups. It is hoped that this paper argues the case for such studies to be further
focused on relations of communication and power, and conflict, whilst working towards
mapping the complex power geometries emerging online and ideological and sub-cultural
currents. These are tasks that remain largely before this author and if this paper is of any
merit and use, us.
2
1
The idiosyncrasy of the terminology used to describe the automation of the research process through use of several
software packages that will enable replication does not compliment the restraints associated with word count. An
account of the methodology that will enable such replication has been placed in an accompanying appendix with only
an overview of the key processes mentioned in the main body of the text and end notes. This is as much an admission
of an incorrect decision by this author to include a pilot study in this constrained paper.
2
Extract one to be found in the appendix, contains two images displaying the user interface for the discussion
boards studied in this paper (Image 1.0) and a Usenet text based system (Image 1.1). In the context of this paper it is
areas two and three outlined in image one where symbolic sets can often be located.
3
In the context of social media moderators refers to those users who have certain privileges allowing them to
manipulate the electronic environment beyond the capacities of other participants. With regards the discussion boards
studied in this paper (PHPBB url), such privileges are encoded in the software which allows, amongst other
possibilities, moderators to remove, edit and replace other users posts. This is to be distinguished from a second
software encoded set of privileges associated with administrator status.
4
In A Brief Guide To Using NetDraw (Borgatti, 2002) Borgatti informs that two basic kinds of layouts are
implemented at present a circle and an MDS/ spring embedded based on geodesic distance, (2002: 2), it is the latter
kind used in this paper and includes [...] options for exaggerating clustering, biasing toward equal-length edges, and
turning on/off node-repulsion, (Borgatti, 2001: 2). The precise options chosen for the layout procedure available with
NetDraw 1) Layout criteria = Distances + N.R. + Equal Edge Lengths, 2) Starting position = Current positions, 3) No.
Of iterations = 100 4) Distance between components = 5, 5) Proximities = geodesic distances.

5
First, this author failed to specify an option within HTTrack that effectively told the software not to delete a web page if
the web page is no longer available, and if a different page available, replace the deleted one with it. Second, this author
failed to manually check the URL targeted by HTTrack had he done so he would have noted that, the discussion boards
had been removed and replaced with a new set of discussion boards minus the topic threads generated through the first
set of discussion boards. An archive of the original set of forums is available however the administrator as a gatekeeper
to such data was reluctant to allow this author access to it. The quality of the data set was poor for a second reason. The
data set used was a test run experimenting with specification of crawl depth or the number of links that HTTrack
should follow from a given starting point and downloading the web pages encountered. This resulted in HTTrack not
downloading users posts in some of the longer threads as these were located a link away. Similar to Yan and Seo
(2003) the tree structure was maintained through inserting copies of the posts that were downloaded for a given thread.

6
One aspect of Nudists versatility includes the ability manipulate node tree structures. Nodes can be generated,
labeled and have text attached and coded to them. For example a node can be associated with a person, say Rita, and all
her discourse attached to the node. Nodes can be grouped into sets of child nodes and attached to a parent node
labeled, for example, users. Similarly a second parent node could be labeled room one and the child nodes labeled
with the title of each topic thread and the text of each coded and attached to it. This latter tree structure is similar to that
in figures 1.1 and 1.4. Specifying both users and room one node trees one can use the crosstabs function to generate
automatically a matrix that can be converted in to one similar to figures 1.3 and 1.6. The appendix not only provides the
precise process and procedures to generate the matrix but also those associated with automating generation of the node
trees. It is hoped that this will allow those with no knowledge and skill in computer programming to participate more
easily in network studies of fields similar to those studied in this paper.
7
The name of this online group has been changed to protect the anonymity of the users.
8
mmax is the highest valued tie in a given data set where any further increments would result in no ties being graphed
between nodes, (mmax in this data set is 170). At the highest value of m only two nodes are connected by a tie, person
A and Person F. Similar to the mmax value the value of m chosen in Fig. 2.0 is one less than the value at which a node
associated with the use of community would be removed or disconnected form the graph.
9
Extract two in the appendix contains copies of these three threads as well others. The features identified earlier are
highlighted and the names and any details that may compromise anonymity removed.
1 0
In the context of online gaming the term clan is used by participants and commentators alike (ref) to describe small
closely-knit online groups with a strong common interests. Some gaming environments support competitive team play
and often the strong interest is one of common victory. Such competitiveness can extend beyond the gaming
environment and tip into wider conflict or clan wars (ref). Some groups communicate and interact through their
own(ership) discussion boards, gaming environments. Often such discussion boards are decked in unique symbolic sets
that operate as identity markers for participants and include textual identity markers based on clan tags attached or
embedded with a users handle e.g. [DA]Bob, [DA]Rita, [DA]Sue

1 1
Spilled is a term used by one participant to refer to thread A where conflict between participants was in evidence.
Thread A spilled from the closed forums in the sense that person A removed it from that form and placed in the open
and publicly available forum.
1