An, um, interesting article on Spiked Online on social software. I'm sure it'll get properly dissected elsewhere, but it makes some statements about Upmystreet Conversations that could do with some clarification.

- "The key idea behind social software is that by using technology we can reinvigorate interest and participation in the democractic process"

[

No, it isn't](http://www.blackbeltjones.com/work/mt/archives/000472.html). As one can tell from the name, it's software that facilitates social interaction. There is a strand of social software that in interested (and sometimes optimistic) about possible political applications.

- "Putnam's thesis, which has found many followers, is that our social fabric is being eroded by by destructive market forces. The argument goes that as we no longer live and associate together in the same way, the potential to participate in the political process is diminished."

No, it isn't. Putnam's thesis uses political participation as one of a broad range of indicators to support the thesis that the level of social interaction in a community is THE key influencing effect on an even broader range of measures of individual wellbeing. I find it hard to imagine how one could misunderstand this, unless one had not actually read the book.

- Upmystreet Conversations has been deliberately built as a neutral platform on which people can discuss whatever they like. I'm not a social engineer, either in the Marxist or the New Labour sense, but everything I've built has been guided by the belief that the wonking classes deliberately exclude and assume the stupidity of the population in a way that is entirely unjustified. To snipe at Conversations because it is "full of hot air about local pubs, clubs and organic food" is just snobbery. This is exactly what we wanted people to be talking about.

I have personal hopes that some Conversations may lead to some collective activity that improves local life (but after 8 weeks, as Zhou En Lai once said, "it's too early to tell"). But I'm much more interested in people banding together to fix the broken paving slabs down their road, or start a bridge club, or just have a drink. Because that's where the real action is.

- "An Upmystreet press release assures us that we have the most in common with people 'who live close by.' Forget the idea of sharing commonality along ideological or political grounds - it's what's going on in the hood that matters most." This statement is undoubtably true, as the marketeers know better than most. Upmystreet Conversations is not intended as a replacement for other forms of communal or political activity, but it does attempt to approach it from a different viewpoint. That's all. We don't want to stop you from going to your Socialist Worker meetings or Conservative Club, but we try to give you place to interact with your neighbours that is less threatening than going round and knocking on their door.

- "The real consequence of the discussion around social software is the cheapening of participation" I used to wonder/worry about this. But I've had three years of real, practical evidence that it's not true. I wonder what evidence Martyn has for his assertion? The corollary is also interesting- If reducing the barrier to entry and letting the plebian hordes join in reduces the meaning of political debate, shouldn't we be raising the barriers higher? Denying the unemployed the vote? Perhaps homeowners only? Perhaps we could restrict it to a specially selected group of properly qualified wonks and lobbyists.

- I'm glad that he read our press release. I wish he could have used the contact details to ask us about Conversations. The fact that he didn't leads me to suspect that the article is that oldest of online social interactions, the good old-fashioned troll. In these days of blogging, probably still the easiest way for someone who isn't getting much to draw attention to themselves.

I look forward to a hearing from you, Martyn.