Is it possible that the reason we're having so much trouble theorising community formation via electronic communications is that we're still trying to impose traditional models onto what we're seeing?

I can understand why we would compare neighbourhoods with electronically mediated networks and, after all, much of the texting and mobiling that goes on is for the purpose of organising face to face contact. Still, I think phone facilitated networking is very different from online communities. Even though some people use online communication as a sort of introductory phase of a relationship there are many many more who are content to be online beings.

I would be interested to know how people reconcile their online identities with the rest of their lives. Do online communities fill a gap or do they add a further layer of sociability? Given that we could reasonably expect the shape of things to be very different a couple of years from now perhaps the best we can do for the time being is just watch and document the change.

I think that the problem with "online communities" is that they lack the amount of responsability imposed by a real community. They can be entered and exited by the click of a mouse and there are no repercussions for bad behaviour. Thus they are perfect for those who want no responsability, and will resort to this plastic community for it.

Ultimately, the only proper community is one build around shared human contact - especially by those of not only locality, but also cultural or religious identity. There are many things in our nation which can form the basis for community... volunteer groups like life savers, SES, rural fire brigade... amateur and professional sporting clubs... churches and schools... community groups, political parties and societies. Surely we should encourage these rather than the plastic online communities!

I notice amongst my peers that those who volunteer, play sport, attend church, attend elite schools which emphasis school spirit and community, and are part of political parties tend to avoid online communities. Perhaps the real thing is best!

Chainsmoker - some people have little choice if they want to partake in conversations other than sport. That seems to be the only topic where most people will actually have their own ideas. For all other topics, I find most of them are happy to play follow the leader and have all the thinking done for them. All they want is to be told ' this is the way you should think, after all the experts know best', and they are willing to accept the lies and half truths!
I have great difficuly coming to terms with the fact that there are people who actually teach others how to think!
If I dare to suggest that a person may do better to make their own choice after consideration of all the facts, I am told "what would you know about it?" After all, I only attended primary school and they went on to secondary and/or university education. Most of my peers have mistaken my lack of formal education for lack of intelligence. Well, I prefer to think for myself, even if I may get the wrong end of the stick at times!
Yes, online communities fill a gap. I can take part without ridicule (well perhaps not now that I have revealed my deep, dark secret).
As for mobiling (no I do not and will not have one) to arrange face to face contact, I think it is more to avoid face to face contact!

DFXK - Why are you here?
I work, I volunteer, I am a responsible member of my community.
There are repercussions for bad behaviour, it's called conscience.
It is not only elite schools who foster school spirit and community.
Perhaps if you got down from your high horse occassionally you may see real people, and not just those like you, who pretend to be one thing and are actually a plastic impression.
You make me sad for your ignorance.

DFXK.
Although your comments about "this plastic community" in general may have some relevance. In my special case I find your generalisation offensive. I have Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia and find that there is little support or understanding of my illness in the "real community". I am a member of The Association of Online Cancer Resources and this very real online community is like a family to me. We have over two thousand members with CLL worldwide and the sharing of treatment options, medications, symptom relief and emotional support are just not possible in any other way. There are very real repercussions for bad behaviour, just like in real life you get told off.
I my case I need my online community as I am house bound and with only 500 people in Australia with CLL an online community is the perfect solution, please consider this when calling them "plastic communities" they may be different but they are very real.

I like the article! There is just a technical modification, I would like to suggest as in the following sentence "Sociologists such as Barry Wellman describe how people construct their social networks with the help of new media tools" the link to Barry Wellman goes to Manuel Castells instead of Barry Wellman! I suppose the correct link for Barry Wellman would either be http://www.utoronto.ca/sociology/faculty/wellman.html or http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~wellman/ ! As already mentioned, it's only a technical remark of a wrong link!
Thanks for modifying it!
Regards
Lucas