Talk:Smart mob

Old unthreaded discussions
Curiously, this article does not really explain what a smart mob really is, or how it is distinguished from e.g. a flash mob... I'm still in the dark.

>The difference between a flash mob and a smart mob is that a flash mob is a mob for fun, doing something essentially useless, whereas a smart mob denotes any type of mob operating collectively through networked communication. Effectively a flash mob is a type of smart mob. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.138.82.195 (talk • contribs)


 * I agree. The fist think would be to define properly and to explain the difference between flash and smart mobs. Not what they do. This article is not constructed with logics and encyclopedical ways in mind.

The previous message is interesting, and is more interesting that the content of the article itself.

Then perhaps the two articles should be merged? Zero sharp 23:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * yes, definitively should be merged "mobs", and have a part for flash mobs, and a part for smart mobs, (because they are a particular case of flash mobs)

---

Question: Does Project Chanology count as a smart mob? It seems like it does to me, but nobody seems to have brought it up so far. Would it be safe to add that? Webster100 (talk) 18:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd say it deserves to be mentioned here, yes.--Father Goose (talk) 22:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

---

I forgot how to comment rightly on this page, the form and what not. So here's my observation.

One of the examples listed as a possible flash mob was the way the Spanish people reacted negatively toward the incumbent politicos after the 11M bombings. However, their negative reaction may be more likely attributed to simple face-value reaction.

The elections were held nearly immediately after the attacks, so when things like this happen, one usually sees a nation brewing with tension and anger toward some level of government. I don't see how this could be considered a smart mob.

It's more likely a mass hysteria-related social behavior, just like how Americans eagerly enlisted in WWII after japan attacked, but before that, the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted no part in the war. Events with impact like that are usually the cause of any mass reaction, not technology. If anything, technology in terms of media broadcasting and reception just allows for faster transmission of stimuli, and thus faster reactions.

I don't think the Spanish people took to their thumbs a la smart mobs and texted all their pals to vote out the Prez because of the recent attacks; I think the people just sort of decided that on their own, without the aid of any technology other what existed before the invention of the term 'smart mob'. If this example remains, then one could feasibly preclude that any mass action/reaction in a high-technology society is in fact a smart mob, and that assumption would be fallacious.

the page lists Jungist in the "see also". i do not see the relevance and suggust it be removed. 72.131.118.88 02:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

"Merge" recommendation stalled (as it should be)
Although the December 2006 AfD consensus was "merge with Smart Mobs", this merge was never carried out. Although the general term and the book are closely related, the term has a life separate from the book (particularly in relation to flash mobs), so I hope this merger is firmly stalled. More edits on all the articles in question are needed before their independence can be more fully established.--Father Goose 05:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. I thought about it, and I think that the article should stay. I cannot think of a synonym - another article on this this could be merged to. I found some references and  which do define the term. It is heavily related to R.'s book, which is often cited in context, but it's inevitable as the book name contains the term. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:30, 12 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Please merge flash and smart mobs and explain, the article, as it is, is not well constructed. A lot of people seems to have noticed that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:96C:13E4:5D2A:6A31 (talk) 21:14, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Some confusing language
The first section contains some unclear and confusing language. For example, "because of its exponentially increasing network links" is pretty vague for the very first sentence. What exactly are these network links, and why are they exponentially increasing? And then in the third paragraph: "One reason for the rise of smart mobs is the ever decreasing cost of increasingly powerful microprocessors which have allowed them to permeate throughout society — they are embedded in everything from boxes to clothes." How exactly has the presence of microprocessors in "everything from boxes to clothes" caused a rise in smart mobs? Why are microprocessors even mentioned in an article about a human social phenomenon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.76.224.26 (talk) 07:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. I was mystified at first by the article's assertion that "parallels are made to, for instance, slime molds", but eventually found some descriptions of slime molds that made the sentence seem less ludicrous than on first examination, so I did not change it. I would suggest that a citation be given for where such parallels have seen made in publications other than Wikipedia, however, since our articles are not supposed to be original research or primary sources.     - Emerman (talk) 02:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Removing social capital section
I removed this section as it seemed to be poorly integrated with the article, and mostly off topic. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:30, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Smart mob. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215184050/http://music.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1031144.php to http://music.monstersandcritics.com/news/article_1031144.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:16, 9 December 2017 (UTC)