Group chats fill a need for small, private social networks 2022-02-12 Social networks have become these huge things that don't feel at all personal. Think of Facebook—I don't even go on there anymore. And if I do, it's definitely not to interact with my friends. Or even really to interact with people I know. Online social networks no longer reflect the realities of natural social networks, which our brains are used to and which we have lots of experience navigating. What's missing here is small computerized social networks, a niche that isn't properly filled by anything anymore. Some people have been experimenting with small social networks (see How to run a small social network site for your friends), but this type of online space is largely inaccessible to the average user. I suppose when a need arises, something rises to fill it. Group chats are growing to satisfy the unspoken demand for small social networks. Having their origins in the humble Group SMS, the group chat has grown to be a staple of online communication and has diverged into several implementations. Popular are iMessage, Telegram, Signal, WhatsApp, and Facebook Messenger. I use all of these, each for a different person or purpose. Here are some features added to most group chat apps in the last several years: - Emoji/symbol reactions to messages (iMessage, Signal, Facebook Messenger) - Message replies or threading replies (all) - @mentions (iMessage, Facebook Messenger, ...) - Stickers and apps (iMessage at least) - Changing group chat names (iMessage, Signal, ...) - Changing group chat photos (iMessage, Signal, ...) - Bots (Telegram) - Admins (Signal, Telegram, ...) - Video call integration (iMessage, Signal) All these features represent steps towards making the group chat a more robust space for socializing, rather than just sending messages. So there's this trend. If groups chats are becoming more than just chats, what's next? Membranes are extremely important when it comes to social networks, but membrane systems are not being developed carefully for group chats (especially in iMessage). What do I mean when I say a membrane? Membranes are social boundaries. Membranes answer questions like Who can be a member?, Who can onlook? Who can participate? Who can control others' membership? Social membranes are complex things that vary from context to context. Right now, membranes in social web applications are often realized as "Permissions" or levels of membership. I'll call them membranes here to invoke the bigger, more complex reality of the levels of social closeness that I hope our apps can someday better represent. More robust and flexible membrane systems are so so important for making the small social networks that group chats are turning into really fun and natural to use. Currently membrane systems are pretty rigid and probably not thought of as very important by developers. As an example, stubby membrane systems like iMessage's options for inviting new users, removing users, and leaving a groupchat lead to awkward ways of doing simple actions. Let's review the iMessage membrane system. In iMessage you can: - Create groupchat with yourself and n>=2 other people - Add someone else to a groupchat you're a member of - Leave a groupchat, if it has 4 or more members This membrane system means weirdly complex actions are necessary to get a simple desired outcome. If you want to remove someone else from a group chat, your only option is to create a new groupchat with the same group minus that one person. This also has the effect to shadowban the person. If you want to introduce three people, you can create a group chat with them and then leave so they can talk without you. But if you want to do this with two people, you can't, because you can't leave a group chat if there's 3 people in it. ...Which is just weird: why can you leave a 4-person conversation in iMessage but not a 3-person one? It's because iMessage doesn't want to have a distinction between a 2-person group chat and a 1-on-1 conversation. But this is a technical reason that doesn't reflect a real social possibility in social groups, so it feels awkward. Membrane systems need to be flexible and honor the complexities of social spaces. Telegram makes a good attempt at this, offering levels of permissions for users, admins to manage users and messages, read-only chats, and bots that can allow even more customization of the membrane system. I would love to see new iMessage features supporting their membrane system be released in the next few years. Tiny little social networks are great! Being able to spin one up for a group of friends and chat, react, reply, and mention each other is a real joy, and a step towards personalized, distributed computerized social networking. People like and need these small social networks (without realizing that's what they are). I see the the spread of more robust group chat features as evidence of this need. Developers of chat apps should start thinking of them as small, personalizable, intimate social networks instead of one-on-one messaging apps with a group chat function. Giving the membrane systems of these apps more attention and intentional development will make it feel even better to use group chats the way people already are—as small social networks.