Do you often find yourself tagging resources, as well as tagging tags themselves and their relations?
Yes? Maybe you should consider becoming a ‘tag whore’. Don’t worry; it’s not as wayward as it sounds.
“if you find yourself posting a photo whose tags end up being a story in and of themselves, then this is the pool for you. short tags, long tags, nonsensical tags, brutally honest tags, tagged tags -- no matter. as long as they go just a wee bit beyond "blue" and "sunset" and "macro," you'll do just fine here...p.p.s. there are two other whore groups -- color whores and texture whores. feel free to come join the ranks. heh heh. (what have i done?!?)” (Flickr 2010).
Members of groups like these have been frequently termed by scholars as ‘extreme taggers’.
The real issue here is whether these ‘extreme taggers’ are detrimentally affecting social bookmarking folksonomies. One of the only articles that I have found that is freely available on the web can be found here. This article provides a handy formal description of extreme tagging and presents the necessity of regulatory processes. The composers, Tanasescu & Streibel (2007) also present a prototype implementation which is pretty in depth and confusing for somebody like me who isn’t very well acquainted with semantic analysis. However, for those who are interested, it may be useful to know in advance that “Semantic Associations are chains of relations between one tag to another, or in graph theoretic terms, a labelled path between two nodes” (Tanasescu & Streibel 2007).
Based on the definition provided by Tanasescu & Streibel (2007), a screenshot of this page may be tagged with “computer”, “Web 2.0” and “folksonomy”. The tag “Web 2.0” itself may then be tagged (possibly by different users) with “internet” and “folksonomy”, and the tag “folksonomy” itself may be tagged with “tagging”.
One of the benefits of this type of tagging is that a tag which has multiple meanings will be ‘solved’ in the sense that every single possibility of its interpretation is canvassed. The user can then decide to filer accordingly.
As the name suggests ‘Tagopedia’ is an extreme tagging site, based on the top of Facebook platforms. Tag entries are based on URL’s. You can access more information on about 'Tagopedia"by clicking on the following link:
What could possibly motivate people to voluntarily tag content on a day-to-day basis? This was a question that I had continually asked myself at the beginning of semester. In this post I’m going to share my insights and handy articles that I have found on my quest for answers.
Needless to say, as user participation is entirely voluntary, user motivation has been identified as a key factor in the mechanisms contributing to the success of tagging systems. However, as mentioned in a study conducted by Korner et al., we still know very little about the ‘underlying user motivations for tagging, and how they influence resulting folksonomies and tags’ (Korner et al. 2010).
Many of the articles that I was able to source online suggest that tagging motivation is a rather complex construct. The consensus in several of these articles is that the distinction between users as either ‘categorizers’ or ‘describers’ is one that is effective. Apart from this, Korner et al. notes that the ‘reasons why users tag- and ways to measure it- have remained largely elusive’ (Korner et al. 2010).
Who are ‘categorizers’? Why do they matter?
They want to construct and maintain a navigational aid to the resources being tagged. Let’s say for instance if I wanted to make sure that I could navigate my way back to a set of resources, I would use a limited, stable set of terms (eg. ‘Sophie’s family photos’ or ‘favorite sites’).
Tags assigned are very similar to the mental model of users.
Tags can act as effective facilitators for navigation and browsing.
A categorizer will probably reject tags that are from the online community because they are solely interested in maintaining and developing their own taxonomy.
Describers engage in tagging because they want to accurately and precisely describe the resources being tagged. This involves the describer wanting to create an open set of tags consisting of an unlimited set of terms.
A descriptor aims to identify tags that match the source the best.
These tags are suitable facilitators for description and searching.
A describer is a useful addition to any social bookmarking system, as they focus on the content of their own and other people’s resources.
I would like to point out to everyone that it is a combination of both these categorizers and describers that contribute to folksonomies. We should also recognize that of course not every user of a social bookmarking site is either one or the other. I assume that it is common that there are people at all ends of the spectrum, from people that both categorize and describe right up until those people that are extreme describers/ categorizers.
This image is an example of an extreme-categorizer.
This is an example of an extreme describer.
It is interesting that many bloggers have reported finding themselves in a ‘mess’ and have actually indentified this as a result of inconsistencies in their tagging practice. If you’re interested Jason Falls has put together a number of practical tips for tagging your content as well as some ‘Delicious tricks’.
Virtual Communities
This blog is a great example of a virtual community. Similarly to traditional communities, virtual communities requires a vehicle for participation. Blogger is the vehicle which is allowing us to exchange electronic information. Unlike most social bookmarking sites which encompass a wide range of contribution motivations, blog sites consist of a small range of contribution motivations. For instance, I enjoy expressing myself through this blog and the possibility that one day somebody out there will find my information of some use. I have no doubts in saying that all bloggers highly value collaboration. Without such a wide blogging sphere in which bloggers can interact, share and react to each others comments, I am sure that the quality of blogs out there would be considerably lower.
I would like to take a moment to consider an issue that I believe to be of key concern. Recent studies have revealed that an inordinately large number of knowledge base users seek information rather than contribute information. It seems to me that a community cannot be formed on the practice whereby the "takers" far outweigh the "givers". In a study conducted by Tisselli (2010), he also states that this phenomenon should at least be acknowledged.
I would really appreciate your comments on this particular issue. Do you believe that if such motivational factors allow a community to be sustainable then this issue should not be of concern?
Strategic Tagging
In 2007 a huge wave of outrage crashed through Flickr. The result has provided a unique opportunity for scholars to analyze the semiotic dynamics of a particular word within Flickr and social bookmarking sites alike. Tisselli jumped on the opportunity to see just what this means for our perceptions of communities online. Tisselli's article was a very easy read and one that I would recommend for people wanting to gain an insight to the uses of tags and of course, the sense of a virtual community.
They say that at times of crisis, communities come together. Does this apply to virtual communities?
On June 12 2007 Flickr announced that they would be censoring content marked by Flickr users as "inappropriate" or "unsafe"in Singapore, Hong Kong, Germany and Korea. This announcement was met with a massive uproar from the Flickr community, who predominantly channeled their discontent into their tags. The tag 'thinkflickrthink' was quickly taken up by Flickr users. On June 20 this activity peaked with 1854 photos tagged by 60 users on a single day.
Interestingly, most of the anti-censorship tags were added to images originating from images that had already been uploaded! What is even more interesting and more relevant to this post is that the high speed at which a strongly connected network of users was speculated to have been influenced by the topological feature of the network.
As a reaction against studies of tagging motivation which have focused on one type of virtual community, Moore & Serva (2007) argue that a users motivation differs across different types of virtual communities.
The mindmap that I created on Mindomo below (also another handy site...with tagging!) details the fourteen motivational categories and their correlating expressions that Moore & Serva (2007) have collaborated from previous studies. These motivational categories are comprehensive and I suggest they would be a great guide for anybody that is undertaking research in this area. The link to the article can be found here.
For the purposes of this blog and to satisfy my own interests I registered with and perused the 16 social bookmarking sites attached to my blog (see above). I realised that a quality social bookmarking site should contain the following:
A substantial amount of users is required in order to avoid irrelevance.
Comprehensive FAQ / help pages.
A clear and understandable interface.
Good import/export possibilities (import is required to transport bookmarks from one social bookmarking site to another, and vice-versa).
A blog to inform of recent developments/changes/bug fixes etc.
If you don’t want to trawl through the endless number of social networking sites, here are my choices for the best 9 picks.
Owned by Yahoo, Delicious is probably my favourite social bookmarking site and from what I have gathered, the standard by which social bookmarking sites are measured. With its clear interface and simple step-by-step instructions it is possible to log in straight away (using your Yahoo account) and start tagging in a matter of minutes if not seconds! As soon as I joined I was overwhelmed by the sense of community and rich layers of content that are available.
Despite recent criticisms Digg remains the most popular social news site online. No doubt part of its success has resulted from how easy it is for a newcomer to browse through popular articles from a wide range of topics. The way Digg works is that users can ‘digg’ articles that they agree with and ‘bury’ they ones that they disagree with.
With the imminent return of several popular features from its previous version, Digg seems set to make a real comeback and possibly ‘bury’ its competitors for good.
If you don’t already know, the updated version of Digg had caused quite a fuss, and for good reason. Naturally, this has given way for a competitor to raise up the popularity ranks. This competitor is Reddit. The news page on Digg has been saturated with links to discussions and images posted on rival Reddit instead. Many have even speculated that Reddit is actually ‘gaming’ Digg.
Reddit is a social news site that displays news based on the user’s personal preference and what the community likes. Apart from having to wait at least seven minutes before submitting the next URL, Reddit is an awesome site. The best feature of Reddit is the individual recommendations. This way if you spend a considerable amount of time voting on stories or pictures etc that you think are either 'hot' or 'cold', your personal preferences will improve the things that are shown to you.
Digg...Diigo, any connection? Surprisingly no! They're not even competitors!
Claiming to be a social annotation service, Diigo offers something unique to other social bookmarking sites. So lets just say your wandering around the web doing a bit of research and you find something that you want to bookmark. Instead of blindly bookmarking the page you can actually highlight sections of the text and bookmark it leaving the highlighted section in tact for when you return!You can also attach Sticky Notes next to your highlight, which allows you to record your comments.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can see this site really taking up amongst university students, educators and the like. As Diigo allows educators etc to establish a private group and a hold private conversations around bookmarks it is particularly useful in a context where knowledge development, rather than management is expected.
StumbleUpon offers its members a matchless way to navigate around the web. If your one of those people who likes to Google themselves just to see what comes up, or is addicted to the 'lucky' Google search option, you will love this social bookmarking site. Also, if your sick of searching for items in one of the common search engines such as Google and Bing and finding irrelevant, sponsored and outdated material, you should definitely check StumbleUpon out. After joining, and entering a term in the search bar I was astonished with the standard of results. Many of the terms that I entered such as 'Digital Culture', returned results to me that I am quite convinced I wouldn't have been able to find elsewhere. The beauty of StumbleUpon is that you are able to take advantage of your fellow-users research. In addition, you are also able to contribute more tags to the item and/or give it a thumbs up.
If your looking for a better web search tool, look no further than StumbleUpon.
This video pretty much covers what I have said and looks at StumbleUpon on the iPhone:
Oh I heard it through the Newsvine...oh I'm just about to loose my mind...tagger, tagger, yeah!
I have no idea why I haven't used this site before! Quick, spread the word! Launched recently in March 2006 this site really does "bring together big and little media in a way which respects established journalism and empowers the individual". Link. The thing that I love about this site is that it allows absolutely anybody to contribute and places editorial integrity back into the hands of the community.
The site is extremely attractive and well thought out.
Mixx is an extremely popular site reporting visitors in the millions. No doubt a large proportion of these visitors have been as a result of Mixx’s integrationin websites such as USA today, New York Times and CNN. The content on Mixx is just as the name suggests a mix of stories, photos and videos amongst other things contributed by community members of Mixx.
Just to ‘mixx’ it up a little bit more, this site allows the user to be in charge of the content of their page but also of the layout of their page. You can either tell the site how you like it and they will accommodate your needs or you can go that extra step and create a personalised mixture of web content (e.g. images/videos/text-based articles/free-determined Meta tags). Private groups can also be formed amongst users that wish to share additional information regarding their common interests.
Unlike the other social bookmarking sites that I have discussed so far, Flickr is purely for managing images rather than links etc. Before joining up I had somehow managed to navigate my way there several times when searching for photos relating to a specific item. The best thing about Flickr is that anybody can access to photos that are made publicly available, which is most of them. One quick search in the easily identifiable search bar will return results that smash Google images out of the water.
There are two options for membership –the free account and the pro account. Both of these accounts allow members to upload images in a variety of ways to make photosets which are online photo albums. These can be browsed or viewed as a slideshow from anywhere around the world. I really enjoy being a part of a group formed by my digital culture peers. It’s interesting and refreshing to see that most contributors have very strong emotional drivers for sharing images.
The main benefit of Clipmarks is that it still has a relatively small following of users and as a result is quite an intimate experience. Sure, you won’t be able to find the breadth of sources-but is that necessarily a bad thing? I don’t think so. There are so many sites out there already that are all about finding things that you otherwise wouldn’t have, so it’s energizing to see a site that is more about sharing things as part of a community.
