I think it's a key nuance between public and visible for just what Alasdair points out. There are lots of ways that social media gets used that is not public in the large sense, but rather public (or more specifically, visible) to a particular audience. A lot of educators are using social media this way, where they set up permission or invited networks in order to limit scope and the publicness of certain information. These sites aren't (and shouldn't be) substitutions for more secure/authenticated options when grades and other sensitive materials are in play... however they are ways to generate and take advantage of the other underlying principles of SM within a more controlled audience.
There was great discussion in our 8/19 chat to identify the core principles associated with Social Media, and lots of positive energy afterwards to make sure they were specifically culled out from our discussion and listed.
You're right, still brainstorming how to attack it. Just hate to move away from this list without really assimilating the implications. Maybe there's a way to create some subgroups, and address them in a block? Also thought there might be some value in doing a poll to prioritize somehow -
The one keyword that is missing for me and that I talk with users/potential uses about a lot if they want to find value in SM is relevance. Lots of people I know jump into SM and then feel disappointed because they say there was nothing interesting or meaningful/valuable. Almost always I encourage them to be more intentional about how and who they engage with, using relevance as a guide. For me and others that I know, the real value of SM came when I started finding ideas, people, places, etc. that had relevance to me and my life. This doesn't mean only similar or the same as me, I want diversity and like that SM opens me to new ideas, people, possibilities... but relevance keeps me engaged.
I like it although mindset is not the same to me as approach. The mindset seems more internal where as the approach is the external. Everything in the approach list seems like external representation of the mindset.
Still not clear on how public differs from transparent. Also, does honesty naturally flow from transparency?
Another Q re: relationship vs engagement. One is a tactic for accomplishing the other--right? In other words, isn't "relationship" inherent in the concept of engagement.
Finally, what is serendipity in this context? Love the word and believe in its power but not sure it has meaning as a "principle" as much as it is an outcome of being fluid and engaged in a bi-directional way (not just conversing about my points but meaningfully engaging in THEIRS)
I'm replying to my own post because I realize that relevance may be difficult as a "principle" associated with social media in the context of this thread. Perhaps less applicable as a principle in the same way these others... may be better in a different discussion.