Your tribe is the set of all people that (a) you consider to be part of your tribe and (b) who consider you to be part of their tribe. This isn’t a theoretical construct. You can actually enumerate your tribe members from your social graph. Exercise: to what extent does your tribe correspond to national borders?
A digital tribe is a computable object. You can start enumerating your tribesmen from your phonebook and social graph by listing mutuals. Then ask which of them are friends with each other. Dense subgraphs are tribes. In the example below: 14 people, 3 tribes.
Would you agree that your tribe is also an unofficial and unmapped set of individuals below dunbars number? These people influence you either directly or subliminally you may not even speak to them but they do affect your world view by proxy of just being around (the subliminal influencers are often geo constrained)
Nounish Prof ⌐◧-◧
My tribe was very geographically localized to the US and more specifically where I live or used to live. In the past 2 years that has shifted dramatically. I haven’t charted it but the fact that at least once a day I say “what time is it in Australia?” says a lot. https://paragraph.xyz/@nounishprof/timezones
Mac Budkowski (🥝,🥄)
I guess we could construct our tribe via Tinder-like app where you see your friends and both parties need to swipe right to get a match
Hmm. My first thought was roughly 95% correspondence with nationstate borders. Then I thought about .ETHs, how that fits the criteria, and that number gets blown apart.
Tribes are less geographical than they used to be, esp if you don’t agree with the values prevalent in your geography. Saying this, the propinquity effect, i.e. the tendency for people to form friendships with those they encounter often, is real & stronger when encounters are IRL vs virtual. https://bit.ly/43OTobN