Paper presentation at Communities & Technologies 2017 conference. Abstract below. Full paper available at the ACM Digital Library (http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3083677). Co-authored by Airi Lampinen, Donald McMillan, Barry Brown, Zarah Faraj, Deha Nemutlu Cambazoglu, & Christian Virtala. For further publications, see: airilampinen.fi/publications "While urban life requires us to maintain a healthy social distance and anonymity from others, a recurring design goal has been to push against this anonymity and assist in the formation of communities. In contrast, our aim in this paper is to design for keeping others at a comfortable distance, without seeming rude or uncongenial. Building on findings from 20 interviews and two design workshops, we present three design explorations that illustrate opportunities to support a sense of friendly connection in local, communal spaces, without promoting the formation of friendship or other long-term engagements, or requiring the effort and commitment they would necessarily demand."

1. F R I E N D LY B U T N O T F R I E N D S
D E S I G N I N G F O R S PA C E S B E T W E E N
F R I E N D S H I P A N D U N FA M I L I A R I T Y
Airi Lampinen Donald McMillan, Barry Brown,
Zarah Faraj, Deha Nemutlu Cambazoglu & Christian Virtala

2. • Simmel’s essay from 1903,
“The Metropolis and Mental Life”
• Urban life requires us to maintain
social distance and anonymity
• Urban technologies are often instead
designed to assist in the formation
and maintenance of communities of
differing sorts
S O C I A L D I S TA N C E

3. • Establishing and maintaining a balance
between ‘keeping one’s distance’ and
‘being there when needed’ is a skilful
accomplishment (Crow et al, 2002)
• It is worth paying attention to how
people, at times, purposefully avoid
neighborly interactions, and how we
might design for these intentions
S TA R T I N G P O I N T S

4. • How might we design systems that
can help us keep those around us
at a comfortable distance, without
making us seem rude or uncongenial?
• Is it possible to design for
being “friendly but not friends”?
O U R O B J E C T I V E

5. • Semi-structured interviews
with young adults in Stockholm area
• Design workshops
with participants from our industrial and
academic collaborations
• Design explorations
Prototypes designed to be embedded
in local communal spaces
R E S E A R C H P R O C E S S

6. • No desire to become friends
“I have no interest in creating a
relationship as a result of sharing
the same building.”
• Valued being on friendly terms
“I always attempt to be open, greeting
my neighbours, I usually greet [even]
people I don’t recognize [inside the
apartment building].”
I N T E R V I E W F I N D I N G S

7. • Swapping goods as a way to enable
a sense of generalised trust without
explicit face-to-face interaction
• Allowing residents to acknowledge
their neighbours, adding to
a sense of friendly neighbourly
relations without removing the
desired social distance
D E S I G N E X P L O R AT I O N I :
F R I E N D L I N E S S / G A R B A G E R O O M

8. • Glass doors or windows by the
entrance as areas that could support
lightweight interactions among
residents, requiring little in terms
of time or effort
• Our goal was a lightweight way to
use technology to foster a sense of
social connection among residents
D E S I G N E X P L O R AT I O N I I :
AWA R E N E S S / E N T R A N C E

9. • Engaging with the broader local
community, in particular those who come
together around the use of
neighbourhood playgrounds
• Place-based photo sharing as a practice
through which trust within the local
community could grow in an organic way,
without requiring too much too quickly
D E S I G N E X P L O R AT I O N I I I :
T R U S T / P L AY G R O U N D

10. • The slow and gradual nature
of neighbour relations
• Connection that involves low
commitment and/or little effort can
still support meaningful exchanges
• Designs that help neighbours to
‘appear’ friendly, and to perceive
those around them as such
“ F R I E N D LY B U T N O T F R I E N D S ”
D E S I G N O P P O RT U N I T I E S

11. “an openness to limited interaction
when appropriate,
but without an expectation of
moving to a more committed relationship”
F R I E N D LY B U T
N O T F R I E N D S