I really need to write another post to flesh out the centered/decentered subject analogy. But being away from my copies of Derrida's Writing and Difference, I don't think I could do it justice. So I promise more on that later.

You bring up a good point though, there are many community-centered sites already that recognize the value of shared meaning creation and the constitution and re-constitution (becoming) of product offerings based on the ebb and flow of the community. Great examples!

But I think as time goes on, we'll need to develop some kind of interoperable protocol or framework in which “advertising in reverse” works. If it's maintained to individual sites, these can easily become silos.

Doc Sealrs says on the Harvard Post:

“…sites become silos, and silos are a big part of the problem we also have with loyalty cards. All are different. All say We have ways of making you shop. Tll [sic] trap and control you in their own ways. We need something that serves as a customer’s own tool, and works as simply as a keyring, a car key, an emailing, or a text message. 'Here’s what I want: _________.' That’s it.”

(the URL again: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/11/16/adv... )

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that in order for “advertising in reverse” to be truly decentered and democratized, the movement has to be global and not just confined to individual decentered and deomcratized companies.

I also think that in a globally decentered business environment, the scenario you suggested in your second paragraph will become the rule: “The reason the community exists (in these cases) is because they revolve around a product (or type of product), but the connections that form in the community (not just from sellers to customers) are far more important and valuable.”

Wow, that's really heady for the night before Thanksgiving. Thanks for giving me a mental workout. Let's continue to move this conversation forward.

And if you think I'm full of it, please let me know =)

Have a great Thanksgiving Jason.

It is these very platforms that also bring in the connection. To answer your question about connections surpassing products, I say: Absolutely. The reason the community exists (in these cases) is because they revolve around a product (or type of product), but the connections that form in the community (not just from sellers to customers) are far more important and valuable. It becomes hard to measure because one person may only connect to two (or even one) other person.

Does any of this make sense?

I really need to write another post to flesh out the centered/decentered subject analogy. But being away from my copies of Derrida's Writing and Difference, I don't think I could do it justice. So I promise more on that later.

You bring up a good point though, there are many community-centered sites already that recognize the value of shared meaning creation and the constitution and re-constitution (becoming) of product offerings based on the ebb and flow of the community. Great examples!

But I think as time goes on, we'll need to develop some kind of interoperable protocol or framework in which “advertising in reverse” works. If it's maintained to individual sites, these can easily become silos.

Doc Sealrs says on the Harvard Post:

“…sites become silos, and silos are a big part of the problem we also have with loyalty cards. All are different. All say We have ways of making you shop. Tll [sic] trap and control you in their own ways. We need something that serves as a customer’s own tool, and works as simply as a keyring, a car key, an emailing, or a text message. 'Here’s what I want: _________.' That’s it.”

(the URL again: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/11/16/adv... )

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that in order for “advertising in reverse” to be truly decentered and democratized, the movement has to be global and not just confined to individual decentered and deomcratized companies.

I also think that in a globally decentered business environment, the scenario you suggested in your second paragraph will become the rule: “The reason the community exists (in these cases) is because they revolve around a product (or type of product), but the connections that form in the community (not just from sellers to customers) are far more important and valuable.”

Wow, that's really heady for the night before Thanksgiving. Thanks for giving me a mental workout. Let's continue to move this conversation forward.

And if you think I'm full of it, please let me know =)

Have a great Thanksgiving Jason.

It is these very platforms that also bring in the connection. To answer your question about connections surpassing products, I say: Absolutely. The reason the community exists (in these cases) is because they revolve around a product (or type of product), but the connections that form in the community (not just from sellers to customers) are far more important and valuable. It becomes hard to measure because one person may only connect to two (or even one) other person.

Does any of this make sense?

I'm going to devote some time to looking at it more deeply today, but for right now, I'll agree that there seems to be a present split in some orgs between social media marketing and community management.

I think we'd do well to remove it.