Abstract
Virtual community research argues that regulations restricting the kinds of speech in a virtual community decrease the utility to members. However, many virtual communities enact regulations on speech within the virtual community. This research explores the contradiction through a cross-case analysis of virtual communities. It explains the contradiction between research and practice using the theory of collective identity. Communication is important for creating collective identity in virtual communities. However, multiple collective identities can arise. When one collective identity within a virtual community defines itself as adversarial to another, silencing speech emerges as adversarial collective identity creates enduring noise and flames. When the target collective identity creates formal regulations suppressing the adversarial collective identity, communication to foster the target collective identity emerges.
Acknowledgements
This paper received assistance from numerous sources. I would like to thank Pok Hongling, Tay Yi Pei, and Tin Pay Yng for coding. I would also like to thank Andrew Burton-Jones, Boh Wai Fong, Suay Bah Chua, Goh Kim Huat, Lim Wee Kiat, Mark L. Gillenson, Cindy Levey, Mark Keil, Ron Rice, and Christina Soh for comments and insights on earlier drafts of this paper. I benefited from comments from various individuals at OASIS 2004 especially Lynette Kvasny, and Noriko Hara. I am also grateful to members of the Jewish Usenet community for reading and commentary including Jonathan Baker, Ken Bloom, Henry Goodman, Chanoch Kesselman, Dan Kimmel, David Roth, Moshe Schorr and those who wish to remain anonymous. Finally, I am grateful for interviews with members of the Singapore Usenet community including Wynthia Goh, Tan Chong Kee, William Anthony Timmins, and Xiao Jinhong. Any mistakes or omissions are the sole responsibility of the author.