Google+ Communities - Heraldry Community

[Karl Wilcox]

Hello Folks,

Some of you may be aware that Google have had a social network, Google+ for a while now. It has a very different feel from Facebook, a bit more "techie" orientated and upmarket (IMHO). Google recently introduced what they call "Communities", which are public forums for those with particular interests. I have set up a community called "Heraldry" - https://plus.google.com/communities/109584396642217278488

I don't see this replacing rec.heraldry at all, but it does have some different features, for example posts may have photos and videos attached, that are displayed "in-line"; and it is simple to set up sub-forums for specific topics. I've seeded a few sub-forums with example posts, for example, photos of heraldry, useful resources and so on. In the main discussion I've also posted a picture of a shield illustrated in one of the windows of Lincoln Cathedral's Chapter House that I am trying to blazon correctly - some of you may wish to contribute to that discussion!

I hope this may be of interest to some of you.

Thank you for your time,

Karl Wilcox
Lincoln,
England

[Tim Powys-Lybbe]

Post by Karl Wilcox
Hello Folks,
Some of you may be aware that Google have had a social network,
Google+ for a while now. It has a very different feel from Facebook, a
bit more "techie" orientated and upmarket (IMHO). Google recently
introduced what they call "Communities", which are public forums for
those with particular interests. I have set up a community called
"Heraldry" - https://plus.google.com/communities/109584396642217278488
I don't see this replacing rec.heraldry at all, but it does have some
different features, for example posts may have photos and videos
attached, that are displayed "in-line"; and it is simple to set up
sub-forums for specific topics. I've seeded a few sub-forums with
example posts, for example, photos of heraldry, useful resources and
so on. In the main discussion I've also posted a picture of a shield
illustrated in one of the windows of Lincoln Cathedral's Chapter House
that I am trying to blazon correctly - some of you may wish to
contribute to that discussion!
I hope this may be of interest to some of you.

You have not said anything about control: what control do you have the
power to exercise over the subscribers and the content?

[Karl Wilcox]

Hi Tim,

Good question! Google+ Communities are very new and are still developing, however as I understand it, I as moderator (and any other Google+ user that I nominate as such) has pretty much complete control over all aspects. Moderators can create discussions, remove posts, lock them from further comments, remove members or ban them completely. When you create a community you can also choose to make it private, although I have made the Heraldry Community public (anyone can see it, you have to be a member to post). Google+ also has a "positive reputation system" in which individual posts (or individual comments on posts) can be given a "+1" (there's no "-1", and each user can only +1 once). Overall it seems to be well thought out.

Thanks for your comment,

Karl

[Tim Powys-Lybbe]

Post by Karl Wilcox
Hi Tim,
Good question! Google+ Communities are very new and are still
developing, however as I understand it, I as moderator (and any other
Google+ user that I nominate as such) has pretty much complete control
over all aspects. Moderators can create discussions, remove posts,
lock them from further comments, remove members or ban them
completely. When you create a community you can also choose to make it
private, although I have made the Heraldry Community public (anyone
can see it, you have to be a member to post). Google+ also has a
"positive reputation system" in which individual posts (or individual
comments on posts) can be given a "+1" (there's no "-1", and each user
can only +1 once). Overall it seems to be well thought out.
Thanks for your comment,

This sounds a little too enthusiastic for censorship for my taste. The
trouble with old fashioned newsgroups is that they have no censorship
and sometimes some nuisance people deliberately try to wreck a group.
The defence against this is (a) to ignore them and/or (b) to request
their ISP examines their conduct in relation to their local laws.

Your proposed groups would be moderated. That is fine as long as you
have clear policies that can be debated and agreed by the rest. Another
problem with such groups and with Google Groups generally is that when a
person gets it wrong they can remover their words and deny what they had
done, so the archives do not reflect what had actually happened.

My preference, as I have indicated above, is for no censorship and to
rely on the participants slowly learning how to behave in public. I
think this works with most established proper newsgroups and is a trophy
for civilised behaviour. I would therefore encourage unmoderated
groups.

The little point you mentioned about being able to post images is easily
handled here by including the URL of a web-site where those images have
been placed.

What, I wonder, would the British House of Commons be like if there was
no Speaker to moderate the proceedings? Might the MPs slowly learn not
to make idiots of themselves on television and instead to behave in a
civilised manner?

[Raveem]

As usual there are pros and cons. The largest pro for this present group is simply the established community: because it functions reasonably already people are unlikely to shift to another medium (I know that's not your intention) solely for technological convenience or superiority. Then there's the email integration, which Google Plus (or indeed, Google Wave before it) simply do not have.

On the other hand, what posting on G+ _does_ allow is contact with a much larger "passing by" community. People who have "not signed up" can see what their connections have posted in the G+ heraldry group and then take an interest and participate. Heraldry (and related topics), of course, could do with a little more interest in today's world!

Raveem.

Post by Tim Powys-Lybbe

Post by Karl Wilcox
Hi Tim,
Good question! Google+ Communities are very new and are still
developing, however as I understand it, I as moderator (and any other
Google+ user that I nominate as such) has pretty much complete control
over all aspects. Moderators can create discussions, remove posts,
lock them from further comments, remove members or ban them
completely. When you create a community you can also choose to make it
private, although I have made the Heraldry Community public (anyone
can see it, you have to be a member to post). Google+ also has a
"positive reputation system" in which individual posts (or individual
comments on posts) can be given a "+1" (there's no "-1", and each user
can only +1 once). Overall it seems to be well thought out.
Thanks for your comment,

This sounds a little too enthusiastic for censorship for my taste. The
trouble with old fashioned newsgroups is that they have no censorship
and sometimes some nuisance people deliberately try to wreck a group.
The defence against this is (a) to ignore them and/or (b) to request
their ISP examines their conduct in relation to their local laws.
Your proposed groups would be moderated. That is fine as long as you
have clear policies that can be debated and agreed by the rest. Another
problem with such groups and with Google Groups generally is that when a
person gets it wrong they can remover their words and deny what they had
done, so the archives do not reflect what had actually happened.
My preference, as I have indicated above, is for no censorship and to
rely on the participants slowly learning how to behave in public. I
think this works with most established proper newsgroups and is a trophy
for civilised behaviour. I would therefore encourage unmoderated
groups.
The little point you mentioned about being able to post images is easily
handled here by including the URL of a web-site where those images have
been placed.
What, I wonder, would the British House of Commons be like if there was
no Speaker to moderate the proceedings? Might the MPs slowly learn not
to make idiots of themselves on television and instead to behave in a
civilised manner?
--
for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

[a***@gmail.com]

Post by Karl Wilcox
Hello Folks,

Dear Mr. Wilcox:

How do you do? I am not very familiar with all the 'social networking' things, so please bear with me. I write to you in your capacity as a specialist in heraldry. I am designing a device for my husband, and find myself in need of a tech assist. His previous career in the profession of arms presents no difficulty of arms (<g>for obvious reasons,) but his progression into the area of cyber-security has me stumped for any sort of reasonable representation. (I refuse to use Secret Squirrel. On principal.)

Have you any suggestions for the electronic warrior? The lightning bolt as symbolic of electricity, unfortunately has other symbolic associations that are still within living memory.

Thank you
Sadie

[a***@gmail.com]

Post by Karl Wilcox
Hello Folks,

Dear Mr. Wilcox:

How do you do? I am not very familiar with all the 'social networking' things, so please bear with me. I write to you in your capacity as a specialist in heraldry. I am designing a device for my husband, and find myself in need of a tech assist. His previous career in the profession of arms presents no difficulty of arms (<g>for obvious reasons,) but his progression into the area of cyber-security has me stumped for any sort of reasonable representation. (I refuse to use Secret Squirrel. On principal.)

Have you any suggestions for the electronic warrior? The lightning bolt as symbolic of electricity, unfortunately has other symbolic associations that are still within living memory.

Thank you
Sadie