---
title: Why Open Source Software is Social Media
date: 2007-07-27T10:15:01Z
modified: 2007-07-27T10:15:01Z
permalink: "https://redmonk.com/jgovernor/why-open-source-software-is-social-media/"
type: post
status: publish
excerpt: ""
wpid: 1227
categories:
  - Uncategorized
timestamp: 2007-07-27T10:15:01Z
tags:
  - Uncategorized
---

![religion](http://www.gapingvoid.com/religion23667-thumb.jpg)

I was talking to Hugh Macleod of [gapingvoid](http://www.gapingvoid.com/) yesterday – he is one of the world’s foremost practitioners in the art of social object creation and community sustenance. [Stormhoek](http://www.stormhoek.com/) wines. The [Blue Monster](http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/003388.html). The Gaping Void itself: cartoons on the back of business cards (what more social object is there than a [non-boring business card](http://www.redmonk.com/cote/2007/07/24/using-moocom-cards/)? Hugh was [MOO](http://www.moo.com/) before MOO came through.) This morning it struck me – with open source every project, every component, every bug fix is a social object. Open source software is social media. It has rules and connection points, repositories and group norms. [Subversive thinking around Subversion](http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/07/why_congress_ne.html). OSS projects are tools for finding like minds. [Ohloh](http://www.ohloh.net/) is a new service that begins to span the two worlds. When I went to do a quick search on “social object” at Hugh’s place I came across [this](http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/003998.html), which led me to [this](http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/003995.html), which finally led me [here](http://strange.corante.com/archives/2007/06/13/nmkforum07_jyri_of_jaiku.php), where I could check out these 5 principles of social objects, as put forward by [Jaiku](http://jaiku.com/channel/redmonk) founder Jyri Engstrom.

> 1\. You should be able to define the social object your service is built around.
> **code**
>  2. Define your verbs that your users perform on the objects. For instance, eBay has buy and sell buttons. It’s clear what the site is for.
> **source code and version control** 
>  3. How can people share the objects?
> **depends on the license**
>  4. Turn invitations into gifts.
> **this will help you too, can you help me improve it for both of us?**
>  5. Charge the publishers, not the spectators.
> **not sure how this maps to OSS**

This blog is really just a placeholder for discussion. Am I barking or does OSS as social media make sense? It certainly fosters good conversations. I tend to think the reason Hugh got his analysis of OSS so wrong [here](http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/003872.html) is that he wasn’t thinking about social objects, but “shareholder value”. Interestingly enough open source software projects don’t obey [Hugh’s Law](http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/004052.html).

bonus thoughts: O’Reilly’s architecture of participation. The incredible power of View Source. And so on…

bonus link: [Open source applications…magnets for open source infrastructure](http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9738924-7.html).

next update: It seems Tom Coates gets it, [points out Leisa](http://www.disambiguity.com/whats-in-it-for-me-why-people-participate-in-social-networking-websites/). From his presentation [Greater Than The Sum Of Its Parts](http://www.plasticbag.org/files/greater/), key sources of personal motivation in online social networking, being:

 1. Anticipated Reciprocity
 2. Reputation
 3. ‘Sense of Efficacy’
 4. Identification with a group

Like OSS, yes?