Communication
Last updated
Last updated
Users can be engaged in other ways than their standard use of the service. For example, they can be called upon to contribute to the digital commons for which they are part of the community, to promote them, or to carry out a referendum arbitration[^19]. The capacity of representation towards contributors, users and the public, largely determines the capacity to contribute and thus the type and intensity of the value that is collected. Therefore, this capacity of representation should be considered as a component of digital services which, if re-appropriated by a subset of the community or by a third party, could compromise their operation as a common[^20].
A minimum constraint is to provide all contributors with the means to send information to the community, while limiting the amount of solicitations in order to maximise the potential value.
Operational recommendation: allow users to submit their email address, register them in a mailing tool compatible with European law on personal data such as or and commit to a maximal frequency of mailing (once a month, once a week...). Provide contributors with a collaborative writing space such as to prepare the mailings.
In addition to direct messages, the broadcasting tools that are social networks can make it possible to reach a large audience, which can go beyond users and contributors. Again, the ability to reach this audience must be shared.
A contributive commons should provide contributors with means to contact the public, while ensuring that the broadcast messages are highly relevant.
Operational recommendation: draft an editorial charter (), use an account delegation system for each social media used by the service (TweetDeck for Twitter, Business Manager for Facebook...) and have the social account certified by the network operator.
[^19]: These include , the [Ethereum DAO hard fork] vote(https://www.ethereum-france.com/le-hard-fork-the-dao-aura-bien-lieu-mode-demploi/).
[^20]: Although outside the specific case of the digital commons, the example of the means of communication retained by the former president of the association Objectif Train de Nuit, following a renewal of the board by a contested general assembly, leads this structure to have two competing governance bodies, each claiming to be the official one.