MMO Communities (was RE: [MUD-Dev] MMORPG Cancellations: The skyis falling?)

[Derek Licciardi]

J C Lawrence wrote:

> The 250 number has some grounding.  In particular it partially
> relates to Dunbar's number.  Dunbar's number itself derives from
> an academic paper by Robin Dunbar, an anthropologist at University
> College of London, entitled 'Co-evolution of neocortex size, group
> size and language in humans".  A pre-publication version of the
> paper can be found at:

I'm not disputing that it has a foundation.  Using the community
definition of socially knowing each member personally, I can see all
the validity in the law.  The law however very flatly categorizes
everything into one encompassing law and I disagree with that.  I
can however, appreciate its heritage and I'll repeat my proposed
revision of it because I think it includes the current law while
allowing the exploration of larger communities.

  "The group size is inversely proportional to the depth of the
  community but that doesn't mean that a larger group cannot exist.
  A smaller group can have a deeper connection with one another but
  large groups can have a shallow, easier to maintain connection."

Note that this does not imply strength of the bond or standing in
the large group.  I didn't think those topics belonged in the
discussion because it tends to muddy the simplicity of the ratio.

> network graphs and identity mechanics?  Things become more
> interesting when the bindings are rich and tight enough that there
> is not only a shared identity, but there is shared recognition of
> the fact that the identity is shared.  They are not only members
> of the group, but everyone in the gorup knows the others to also
> be members, and they recognise each other.=20=20

I know some still don't want to talk about nationalism.  There is no
reason to go political here if we stay on the idea of what
nationalism is instead of how it's applied.  This description of
where it gets interesting ignores the fact that nationalism is a
strong shared identity and that other members recognize other
members.  What I'm advocating is the change to the law so that our
understanding of groups is not wholly limited by it as seems the
case in current designs.

Yes the bond becomes shallower at higher numbers but that should not
imply that the bond is weaker and therefore not interesting.
Strength and depth are two different measures and strength can be
achieved regardless of group size. (nationalism, unions,
militaries...)

Derek
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev