Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 114 references

Discord's Design Encourages "Third Place" Social Media Experiences

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Discord's spatial design—servers, channels, roles, and open access—can create virtual third places that support both close friendships and community ties, according to interviews with 25 young users.

desk verdict The 21-element taxonomy of Discord's third-place design is a genuinely useful empirical contribution, but the causal framing in the abstract and conclusion outruns the evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09951 v1 pith:TMAVFVLD submitted 2025-01-17 cs.HC

JaeWon Kim , Thea Klein-Balajee , Ryan M. Kelly , Alexis Hiniker This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.HC
keywords thirdplacevirtualDiscordsocialmediadesignrelationship-buildingspaceversusyouthqualitativeinterviews
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Physical third places—cafes, town squares, informal hangouts—are disappearing, and this paper asks whether a social media platform can be designed to replace them. Drawing on the eight characteristics of a third place from the sociological framework it adopts, the authors argue that Discord does exactly this: through 25 interviews with young users who had made new friends on the platform, they identify 21 design elements spanning all eight characteristics. These elements cluster under four principles: themed spaces for repeated interactions, user autonomy and customization, mutually engaging activities, and casual low-pressure interactions. The paper's claim is that intentional spatial design, not just user effort, converts Discord's architecture into a virtual third place where both one-on-one friendships and community ties can grow.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 21-element taxonomy linking Discord affordances to the eight third-place characteristics, organized under four design principles: themed spaces for repeated interactions, autonomy and customization, mutually engaging activities, and casual low-pressure interactions. The argument is carried by the space-versus-place distinction: the platform provides spatial structure, but a sense of place emerges only through repeated user interaction, adaptation, and appropriation. This distinction lets the paper claim that Discord's design creates the conditions for third-place experiences without claiming that the platform itself is a place.

What would settle it

Track friendship formation on Discord at scale—for example, record when two users first exchange a direct message after meeting in a server—and compare servers whose design includes these 21 elements with servers that lack them. If friendship-formation rates do not differ, the taxonomy is not doing the causal work the interviews credit it with.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that Discord's intentional design facilitates third-place experiences on social media, fostering both dyadic and community-based relationship-building. To support this, it constructs a taxonomy of 21 design elements mapped onto the eight third-place characteristics—neutral ground, leveling, conversation as the main activity, accessibility, regulars, low profile, playful mood, and home away from home. The elements include search- and invite-based joining, open-access channels, pseudonymous profiles, contribution-based roles, persistent servers, activity visibility, ephemeral chat, gaming and bot integrations, server customization, interest-based subspaces, and contextual per-server profiles. Users described Discord as a town square, cafe, or game room, and reported forming close friendships, some lasting years and some becoming romantic. The paper's interpretive move is that these features work together as a space that users convert into a place through repeated interaction, following the space-versus-place distinction from prior design theory, and that this design-based approach contrasts with network-based platforms like Instagram.

Load-bearing premise

The causal story depends on the 25 interviewees, all of whom had already formed at least one new friendship on Discord, being able to accurately recall and attribute those friendships to specific design features, rather than reconstructing the causes after the fact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Social-media designers get a concrete checklist of 21 features—such as persistent servers, open-access channels, and activity visibility—for making a platform feel like an informal gathering place.
  • A space-based architecture, organized around servers and channels rather than feeds, can support casual conversation and community belonging for youth even as physical third places disappear.
  • The same design can foster both intimate dyadic friendships and broader community bonds, as participants reported long-lasting and even romantic relationships formed through servers.
  • The taxonomy is offered as extendable beyond Discord to text-based platforms and extended-reality environments, with the caveat that avatar-based spatial features like proximity and action remain unexplored.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct extension the paper leaves untested is an experiment that varies one element at a time—for instance, with or without persistent servers or visible activity status—and measures friendship formation, which would separate necessary features from optional ones.
  • The finding that algorithmic recommendation feels like an intrusion on neutral ground suggests that recommendation-driven platforms may undermine the sense of ownership that supports third-place feelings; this connection is an extrapolation, not a claim in the paper.
  • Because all participants were required to have formed at least one new friendship on Discord, the taxonomy describes conditions that can support tie formation, not conditions that prevent it; studying lurkers, failed communities, or users who leave could reveal missing design requirements.
  • Lowering barriers to connection also lowers barriers to harm, so a design-focused agenda for virtual third places should pair these affordances with safeguards against grooming and harassment, a risk the paper acknowledges but does not develop.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a qualitative interview study (N=25) of youth aged 15–24 who are active Discord users and who had formed at least one new friendship on the platform. Drawing on Oldenburg's third-place framework and Small and Adler's spatial framework, the authors identify 21 design elements across eight third-place characteristics, grouped into four design principles, and argue that Discord's intentional design facilitates third-place experiences and supports both dyadic and community-based relationship-building.

Significance. If the descriptive taxonomy is taken as what it is—a well-grounded qualitative account of perceived affordances—the paper is a useful contribution. It offers a concrete list of 21 design considerations mapped to a classic sociological framework, with illustrative participant quotes and a full interview protocol in Appendix B, which is a transparency strength. The work also connects spatial reasoning and place-making literature to a mainstream 2D social platform, which is a worthwhile extension. However, the central claim as stated in the abstract and conclusion is causal ('Discord's design encourages...'), whereas the evidence is retrospective self-report from a sample selected on the friendship-formation outcome, with no comparison group. The descriptive findings are defensible; the causal language is not.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 6 (Conclusion)] The claim that 'Discord's intentional design facilitates third-place experiences' overstates what the data can support. All participants were required to have formed at least one new friendship on Discord (Section 3.2, criterion 3), and Appendix B questions 6c and 7c ask participants to name which element of Discord 'helped' them, inviting post-hoc attribution. With no comparison group of users who did not form friendships and no baseline measure, the design cannot distinguish design-driven effects from selection or hindsight bias. The authors' own Section 5.4 acknowledges this limitation, so the conclusion and abstract should be softened to 'may support' or 'are perceived by users as supporting,' and alternative explanations should be discussed.
  2. [Table 1 and Section 3.2] There is an internal inconsistency in the sample description. Eligibility criterion 3 requires 'having formed at least one new friendship through Discord,' yet Table 1 reports that 5 of 25 participants (20%) described their Discord connection experience as 'I've made a few casual acquaintances.' If casual acquaintances qualify as friendships under the authors' definition, that definition should be stated explicitly; if not, the authors should report how these five fit the criterion or present a sensitivity analysis excluding them. As written, the inconsistency undermines the claim that all participants represent successful friendship-formation cases.
  3. [Table 2] The 21-element taxonomy is the paper's central empirical contribution, but Table 2 does not report how many of the 25 participants mentioned each element or how many coded segments support each row. Several rows appear to rest on a single quote (e.g., 4D Cross-Platform Support, 7A Gaming Integration), which makes it difficult to assess whether these are robust themes or isolated observations. The authors should report code frequencies, or at least the number of participants contributing to each element, so readers can judge the weight of evidence behind each taxonomy entry.
  4. [Section 4.9] The paper states that ten participants used 'place-like' analogies to describe Discord. That is 40% of the sample, not 'many' as the Introduction claims. The interpretative weight placed on these analogies should be calibrated to their actual prevalence, and the paper should be explicit that a majority of participants did not spontaneously use such analogies.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1] The sentence 'with 28% Discord's design aim is to create...' appears to be missing a clause about the percentage of U.S. teenagers using Discord; please complete the sentence.
  2. [Section 4.6] Typo: 'this person won't kill me' appears mid-sentence with a stray parenthesis in the paragraph on visual anonymity; also '(B)y minimizing' should read 'By minimizing.'
  3. [Section 3.3] The sentence describing the division of interviews between the first and second authors is awkwardly phrased; please clarify whether the first author conducted 21 and the second author 4 interviews, or vice versa.
  4. [Table 1] The demographic table uses '(12; 60%)' for girls while the text reports 15 women (60%); the percentages are inconsistent with N=25 and should be reconciled.
  5. [Appendix B] Questions 6c and 7c are phrased as 'What element of Discord do you think helped you the most...' which is a leading question that presupposes that some element helped. Consider reframing to 'Did any element...' in future work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the taxonomy is an external-framework coding of interview data; minor self-citations are background only.

full rationale

This paper's central contribution is an interview-based taxonomy, not a formal derivation, so there are no equations whose terms reduce to one another. The coding framework (Oldenburg's eight third-place characteristics) is external to the authors, and the paper states the protocol did not introduce third-place concepts: 'We did not introduce the concept of a third place, but when participants made analogies to physical third places, we explored these further while maintaining neutrality' (Section 3.3). The 21 design elements in Table 2 are supported by participant quotes about Discord features that helped relationship-building, and the mapping from quotes to framework categories is an interpretive coding step, not a definitional identity. The authors' prior work is cited only for background: [58] supports the uncontroversial claim that teens spontaneously name Discord as a primary platform (also supported by [8,49,100]), and [59] supports a research-direction claim in the Discussion; neither citation carries the central result. The paper's own limitation statement (Section 5.4) concedes that the sample was selected on the outcome: 'our interviews were conducted with people who actively use Discord and have prior experience forming friendships on the platform. This may introduce bias, particularly in comparisons between Discord and other social media platforms.' That is a real threat to the causal wording in the abstract and conclusion, but it is a validity limitation, not a circularity. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no self-citation chain forces the conclusion, and no known result is relabeled. The causal claim overreaches the qualitative evidence, but the derivation chain is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical fitting or model parameters appear in this qualitative study; the central output is a categorical taxonomy. The 'third place' construct is taken from Oldenburg's prior literature, and no new entities or mediators are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Oldenburg's eight third-place characteristics are applicable to virtual social platforms.
    The coding scheme maps participant quotes onto these eight characteristics, assuming the physical-world framework transfers to Discord without modification. Entered via Section 3.4 Data Analysis and Table 2.
  • domain assumption Retrospective self-reports accurately reflect the design features that caused friendship formation.
    All 25 interviews are post hoc accounts; there is no behavioral logging, experiment, or observation to verify that the cited features were causally effective. Assumed across Sections 3.3 and 4.
  • domain assumption Small and Adler's spatial mechanisms (propinquity, composition, configuration) generalize from physical to virtual spaces.
    Used as the initial deductive coding frame in Section 3.4, extending a sociology-of-space theory to an online platform.
  • ad hoc to paper Participants who formed friendships are a sufficient population for identifying design elements that support third places.
    The eligibility criterion in Section 3.2 requires a prior friendship outcome, which preselects successful cases; the analysis treats their reports as representative of design effects.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Discord's Design Encourages "Third Place" Social Media Experiences." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TMAVFVLD

@misc{pith2026250109951,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Discord's Design Encourages "Third Place" Social Media Experiences},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TMAVFVLD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09951}
}
read the original abstract

In light of the diminishing presence of physical third places -- informal gathering spaces essential for social connection -- this study explores how the social media platform Discord fosters third-place experiences. Drawing on Oldenburg's conceptual framework, we analyze how Discord's design elements support the creation of virtual third places that foster both dyadic and community-based relationships. Through 25 semi-structured interviews with active Discord users, we identified 21 design elements aligned with Oldenburg's third-place characteristics. These elements cluster around four core principles: providing themed spaces for repeated interactions, supporting user autonomy and customization, facilitating mutually engaging activities, and enabling casual, low-pressure interactions. This work contributes to understanding how intentional platform design can cultivate virtual spaces that support meaningful social connections. The findings have implications for designing future social technologies that can help address growing concerns about social isolation in an increasingly digital world.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09951 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Screenshot of Discord’s Server Discovery Page. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Mock-up Screenshots of Discord Features Around Rules and Roles: (a) Sectioned categories with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Screenshot of Notification Settings for Discord’s Official Discord Server. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Mock-up Screenshots of Discord Features Around Conversation Support: (a) Soccer game streaming [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Screenshots of Discord’s Support for Visitors and Newcomers. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Screenshot of Custom Statuses for Discord Profiles (from Discord’s Official Webpage [3]). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Screenshots of Discord’s Support for Playful Interactions: (a) Discord’s logo that resembles a game [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

114 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Animal Crossing series – Official Site. https://animalcrossing.nintendo.com/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  2. [2]

    [n. d.]. Chat. Stream. Vibe. Accessed: 2024-09-04

    2024

  3. [3]

    [n. d.]. Custom Status. https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/360035407531-Custom-Status. Accessed: 2024-12-10

    work page arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    [n. d.]. Telegram – a new era of messaging . Accessed: 2024-09-04

    2024

  5. [5]

    Discord Activities: Play Games and Watch Together

    2024. Discord Activities: Play Games and Watch Together. https://discord.com/blog/server-activities-games-voice- watch-together. Accessed: 2024-12-8

    2024

  6. [6]

    Paul C Adams. 2010. Cyberspace and virtual places. Geogr. Rev. 87, 2 (April 2010), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1931-0846.1997.tb00069.x

    arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Katrina Alcala, Anthony D’Achille, and Amy Bruckman. 2023. The Stage and the Theatre: AltspaceVR and its Relationship to Discord. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, CSCW1 (April 2023), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3579529

    2023

  8. [8]

    Monica Anderson, Michelle Faverio, and Jeffrey Gottfried. 2023. Teens, social media and technology 2023. Pew Res Cent (2023)

    2023

Show all 114 references
  1. [9]

    Katie Baumel, Mara Hamlett, Brittany Wheeler, Deborah Hall, Ashley K Randall, and Kristin Mickelson. 2021. Living Through COVID-19: Social Distancing, Computer-Mediated Communication, and Well-Being in Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adults. Journal of Homosexuality 68, 4 (Ma...

    2021

  2. [10]

    N Baym. 1995. The emergence of community in computer mediated communication. (1995)

    1995

  3. [11]

    J M Bishop, L Taylor, and F Froy. 2000. Computer-mediated communication use by the deaf and hard-of-hearing. Kybernetes 29, 9/10 (Dec. 2000), 1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.1108/03684920010342143

    2000 doi

  4. [12]

    Caryl Bosman and Joanne Dolley. 2019. Rethinking third places and community building. Rethinking Third Places (May 2019). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786433916.00009

    2019

  5. [13]

    danah boyd. 2014. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens (1 ed.). Yale University Press, New York

    2014

  6. [14]

    Kellen Browning. 2021. 5 Ways Young People Are Using Discord. The New York Times (Dec. 2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Kellen Browning. 2021. How Discord, Born From an Obscure Game, Became a Social Hub for Young People. The New York Times (Dec. 2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Amy Bruckman. [n. d.]. Finding One’s Own in Cyberspace

  9. [17]

    Amy Bruckman and Mitchel Resnick. 1995. The MediaMOO project: Constructionism and professional community. Converg. Int. J. Res. New Media Technol. 1, 1 (March 1995), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/135485659500100110

    1995 doi

  10. [18]

    bumble bff [n. d.]. Find New Friends With Bumble For Friends App. https://bumble.com/bff. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  11. [19]

    Business of Apps. 2020. Discord Revenue and Usage Statistics (2024). https://www.businessofapps.com/data/discord- statistics/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  12. [20]

    Pablo Cabrera-Barona, Gabriel Gaona, and Andrea Carrión. 2023. Importance of public space, neighbors’ support, and safety in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. J. Urban Manag. 12, 3 (June 2023), 284–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2023.06.001

    2023 doi

  13. [21]

    Vicky Cattell, Nick Dines, Wil Gesler, and Sarah Curtis. 2008. Mingling, observing, and lingering: everyday public spaces and their implications for well-being and social relations. Health Place 14, 3 (Sept. 2008), 544–561. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2007.10.007

    2008 doi

  14. [22]

    Third Place

    Mina Choi and Hyesun Choung. 2021. Mediated communication matters during the COVID-19 pandemic: The use of interpersonal and masspersonal media and psychological well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 38, 8 (Aug. 2021), 2397–2418. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265...

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    Tatiana Cirisano. 2020. How Gamer Chat App Discord Is Connecting Artists With Core Fans. http://www.billboard. com/pro/discord-connecting-music-artists-with-fans-chat-platform/. Accessed: 2024-9-3

    2020

  16. [24]

    Jason Citron. 2020. Building On Our Momentum. https://discord.com/blog/building-on-our-momentum. Accessed: 2024-12-8

    2020

  17. [25]

    Randall Collins and Peter M Blau. 1979. Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. Soc. Forces 58, 2 (Dec. 1979), 677. https://doi.org/10.2307/2577612

    1979 doi

  18. [26]

    Neil S Coulson, Heather Buchanan, and Aimee Aubeeluck. 2007. Social support in cyberspace: a content analysis of communication within a Huntington’s disease online support group. Patient Educ. Couns. 68, 2 (Oct. 2007), 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2007.06.002

    2007 doi

  19. [27]

    Discord. [n. d.]. Discord - Group Chat That’s All Fun & Games. https://discord.com/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  20. [28]

    Discord. [n. d.]. Role Management 101. https://support.discord.com/hc/en-us/articles/214836687-Role-Management-

  21. [29]

    Discord connects friends, peers during pandemic

    discord connects friends, peers during pandemic 2021. Discord connects friends, peers during pandemic. https: //www.coastreportonline.com/features/article_9a7a4db2-bf25-11eb-90ce-0bf413ec7b54.html. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2021

  22. [30]

    Discord’s COVID-19 Response

    discord covid 19 response 2020. Discord’s COVID-19 Response. https://www.zendesk.com/customer/discords-covid- 19-response/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2020

  23. [31]

    third places

    Nicolas Ducheneaut, Robert J Moore, and Eric Nickell. 2007. Virtual “third places”: A case study of sociability in massively multiplayer games. Comput. Support. Coop. Work 16, 1-2 (April 2007), 129–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10606-007-9041-8

    2007

  24. [32]

    Brianna Dym and Casey Fiesler. 2018. Generations, migrations, and the future of fandom’s private spaces. TWC 28 (Sept. 2018). https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2018.1583

    2018

  25. [33]

    Katie Ellis and G Goggin. 2013. Disability and social media. The social media handbook (Oct. 2013), 134–151. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203407615-15

    2013 doi

  26. [34]

    Firat Erdoğmuş. 2009. CONCEPTUALIZING ONLINE ENVIRONMENTS AS THIRD PLACES: AN ANALYSIS ON SECOND LIFE AND FACEBOOK

    2009

  27. [35]

    Thomas Erickson and Wendy A Kellogg. 2000. Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 7, 1 (2000), 59–83

    2000

  28. [36]

    Jennifer Fereday and Eimear Muir-Cochrane. 2006. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International journal of qualitative methods 5, 1 (2006), 80–92

    2006

  29. [37]

    Geraldine Fitzpatrick, Simon Kaplan, and Tim Mansfield. 1996. Physical spaces, virtual places and social worlds: a study of work in the virtual. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work - CSCW ’96. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA. htt...

    1996

  30. [38]

    J W Foster. 2013. Oldenburg’s great good places online: assessing the potential for social network sites to serve as third places. (2013)

    2013

  31. [39]

    Guo Freeman and E Jacob. 2012. Reconceptualizing Cyberspace: “Real” Places in Digital Space. International Journal of Science in Society 3, 2 (2012), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.18848/1836-6236/CGP/V03I02/51318

    2012 doi

  32. [40]

    Barbro Fröding and Martin Peterson. 2012. Why virtual friendship is no genuine friendship. Ethics Inf. Technol. 14, 3 (Sept. 2012), 201–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-011-9284-4

    2012 doi

  33. [41]

    Mark Giese. 1998. Constructing a virtual geography: Narratives of space in a text-based environment. J. Commun. Inq. 22, 2 (April 1998), 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859998022002004

    1998 doi

  34. [42]

    Erving Goffman. 2016. The presentation of self in everyday life. In Social Theory Re-Wired. Routledge, 482–493

    2016

  35. [43]

    Rebecca Haddad. [n. d.]. The Rise of Discord Among Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic. https://www.thelance. ca/2021/09/27/the-rise-of-discord-among-students-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2021

  36. [44]

    Oliver L Haimson, Justin Buss, Zu Weinger, Denny L Starks, Dykee Gorrell, and Briar Sweetbriar Baron. 2020. Trans Time: Safety, Privacy, and Content Warnings on a Transgender-Specific Social Media Site. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 4, CSCW2 (Oct. 2020), 1–27. https://doi.o...

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    William A Hamilton, Oliver Garretson, and Andruid Kerne. 2014. Streaming on twitch: fostering participatory communities of play within live mixed media. InProceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.114...

    2014

  38. [46]

    Steve Harrison and Paul Dourish. 1996. Re-place-ing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work - CSCW ’96 . ACM Press, New York, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/240080.240193

    1996

  39. [47]

    Jim Hollan and Scott Stornetta. 1992. Beyond being there. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Monterey, California, USA) (Chi ’92). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 119–125. 27 Woodstock ’18, June 03–05, 2018, W...

    1992

  40. [48]

    Third Place

    John B Horrigan. 2001. Part 2: The Internet, Communities, and the Virtual “Third Place”. https://www.pewresearch. org/internet/2001/10/31/part-2-the-internet-communities-and-the-virtual-third-place/. Accessed: 2024-8-20

    2001

  41. [49]

    Josh Howarth. 2023. Top 35 Social Media Platforms (September 2024). https://explodingtopics.com/blog/top-social- media-platforms. Accessed: 2024-12-9

    2023

  42. [50]

    Kelin Hull and Cory Pettit. 2021. Making community through the utilization of discord in a (suddenly) online writing center. The Peer Review 5, 2 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Julie Jargon. 2019. The Dark Side of Discord, Your Teen’s Favorite Chat App. The Wall Street Journal (June 2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Elijah Jhee. [n. d.]. It’s called Discord, but the instant messaging app has actually done more uniting during COVID-19 pandemic. https://shhsaccolade.com/4890/ae/its-called-discord-but-the-instant-messaging-app-has-actually-done- more-uniting-during-covid-19-pandemic/. Access...

    2024

  45. [53]

    Heather Kelly. 2021. They laughed, they cried, they killed monsters: How friendships thrived in video games during the pandemic. https://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/they-laughed-they-cried-they-killed-monsters-how- friendships-thrived-in-video-games-during-the-pandemic/...

    2021

  46. [54]

    Samantha Murphy Kelly. 2022. The dark side of Discord for teens. https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/22/tech/discord- teens/index.html. Accessed: 2024-7-29

    2022

  47. [55]

    Lori Kendall. 2002. Hanging out in the virtual pub: Masculinities and relationships online . University of California Press

    2002

  48. [56]

    Amy Jo Kim. 2000. Community building on the web: Secret strategies for successful online communities . Addison Wesley, London, England

    2000

  49. [57]

    Da-Jung Kim and Youn-Kyung Lim. 2015. Dwelling Places in KakaoTalk: Understanding the Roles and Meanings of Chatrooms in Mobile Instant Messengers. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 775...

    2015

  50. [58]

    Jaewon Kim, Soobin Cho, Robert Wolfe, Jishnu Hari Nair, and Alexis Hiniker. 2024. Privacy as Social Norm: Systemat- ically Reducing Dysfunctional Privacy Concerns on Social Media. arXiv [cs.HC] (Oct. 2024). arXiv:2410.16137 [cs.HC]

    2024

  51. [59]

    Jaewon Kim, Lindsay Popowski, Anna Fang, Cassidy Pyle, Guo Freeman, Ryan M Kelly, Angela Y Lee, Fannie Liu, Angela D R Smith, Alexandra To, and Amy X Zhang. 2024. Envisioning new futures of positive social technology: Beyond paradigms of fixing, protecting, and preventing. InC...

    2024

  52. [60]

    Robert E Kraut, Paul Resnick, and Sara Kiesler. 2011. Building successful online communities: evidence-based social design. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass

    2011

  53. [61]

    Werner Kuhn and Brad Blumenthal. 1996. Spatialization: spatial metaphors for user interfaces. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems common ground - CHI ’96 . ACM Press, New York, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/257089.257361

    1996

  54. [62]

    Frankie Lantican. 2020. I Found a Family in Strangers I Met on Discord During the Pandemic. https://www.vice. com/en/article/making-friends-strangers-discord-coronavirus-pandemic-internet-social-media-online/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2020

  55. [63]

    Soyoung Lee and Kentaro Toyama. 2024. Friendship formation in an enforced online regime: Findings from a U.s. university under COVID. Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. 8, CSCW1 (April 2024), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3641007

    2024

  56. [64]

    Taylor Lorenz. 2019. How an App for Gamers Went Mainstream. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/ 2019/03/how-discord-went-mainstream-influencers/584671/. Accessed: 2024-7-29

    2019

  57. [65]

    Paul P Maglio and Teenie Matlock. 1999. The conceptual structure of information space. In Social Navigation of Information Space. Springer London, London, 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0837-5_9

    1999 doi

  58. [66]

    Making Markets. [n. d.]. Discord: Building the Third Place - [Founder’s Field Guide, Replay]

  59. [67]

    E Markiewicz. 2019. Third places in the era of virtual communities. Studia Periegetica 28 (2019), 9–21

    2019

  60. [68]

    John A McArthur and Ashleigh Farley White. 2016. Twitter chats as third places: Conceptualizing a digital gathering site. Soc. Media Soc. 2, 3 (July 2016), 205630511666585. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116665857

    2016 doi

  61. [69]

    Rea McNamara. 2021. How Artists Used the Discord App to Build Community During COVID-19. http://hyperallergic. com/632565/how-artists-used-the-discord-app-to-build-community-during-covid-19/. Accessed: 2024-9-3

    2021

  62. [70]

    meetup [n. d.]. Meetup. https://www.meetup.com/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  63. [71]

    Jennifer V Meier, Josephine A Noel, and Kai Kaspar. 2021. Alone together: Computer-mediated communication in leisure time during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psychol. 12 (June 2021), 666655. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2021.666655

    2021

  64. [72]

    Third Place

    Robert Moore, E Hankinson Gathman, and Nicolas Ducheneaut. 2009. From 3D space to third place: The social life of small virtual spaces. Hum. Organ. 68, 2 (June 2009), 230–240. https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.68.2.q673k16185u68v15 28 Discord’s Design Encourages “Third Place” Soci...

    2009 doi

  65. [73]

    Jo Moses. [n. d.]. In praise of Discord for making quarantine connections. http://eic.opalstacked.com/in-praise-of- discord-for-making-quarantine-connections/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2024

  66. [74]

    Michael Nitsche. 2009. Video game spaces: Image, play, and structure in 3D worlds . Mit Press

    2009

  67. [75]

    Office of the Surgeon General (OSG). 2023. Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community . Technical Report. US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington (DC)

    2023

  68. [76]

    Office of the Surgeon General (OSG). 2023. Social Media and Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory . Technical Report. US Department of Health and Human Services

    2023

  69. [77]

    R Oldenburg. 1997. Our vanishing third places. Planning commissioners journal 25, 4 (1997), 6–10

    1997

  70. [78]

    Ray Oldenburg. 1999. The Great Good Place: Cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community . Da Capo Press, London, England

    1999

  71. [79]

    Ramon Oldenburg and Dennis Brissett. 1982. The third place. Qualitative sociology 5, 4 (1982), 265–284

    1982

  72. [80]

    Malcolm R Parks and Lynne D Roberts. 1998. ‘Making Moosic’: The Development of Personal Relationships on Line and a Comparison to their Off-Line Counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 15, 4 (Aug. 1998), 517–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407598154005

    1998 doi

  73. [81]

    L Rainie. 2012. Networked: The new social operating system. (2012)

    2012

  74. [82]

    Devika Rao and The Week US. 2024. The unfortunate, ongoing disappearance of ’third places’. https://theweek.com/ culture-life/third-places-disappearing. Accessed: 2024-8-20

    2024

  75. [83]

    Third Places

    Kali Saposnick. 2016. Making a Garden Out of a Jungle: The Power of “Third Places”. https://thesystemsthinker.com/ making-a-garden-out-of-a-jungle-the-power-of-third-places/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2016

  76. [84]

    C Saunders, A Rutkowski, M Genuchten, D Vogel, and J M Orrego. 2011. Virtual space and place: Theory and test. Miss. Q. 35 (Dec. 2011), 1079–1098. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409974

    2011 doi

  77. [85]

    Douglas Schuler. 1996. New community networks: Wired for change. (Jan. 1996)

    1996

  78. [86]

    Kevin N Shufford, Deborah L Hall, Ashley K Randall, Bailey M Braunstein, Mary M O’Brien, and Kristin D Mickelson

  79. [87]

    Slack. [n. d.]. Where work happens. https://slack.com/. Accessed: 2024-12-9

    2024

  80. [88]

    Mario L Small and Laura Adler. 2019. The role of space in the formation of social ties. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 45, 1 (July 2019), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073018-022707

    2019 doi

  81. [89]

    Renato Soeiro, Gabriel David, and Ana M A Neves. 2023. Discord in a university STEM learning environment: collective learning. (2023)

    2023

  82. [90]

    Charles Soukup. 2006. Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web. New Media & Society 8, 3 (June 2006), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1461444806061953

    2006

  83. [91]

    Russell Spears and Martin Lea. 1994. Panacea or panopticon?: The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communic. Res. 21, 4 (Aug. 1994), 427–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365094021004001

    1994 doi

  84. [92]

    third places

    Constance A Steinkuehler and Dmitri Williams. 2006. Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places”. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 11, 4 (July 2006), 885–909. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00300.x

    2006

  85. [93]

    Kate Sukhanova. 2023. The Latest Discord Statistics & Trends for 2023. https://techreport.com/statistics/software- web/discord-statistics/. Accessed: 2024-9-4

    2023

  86. [94]

    Christy Tidwell. 2023. In Defense of FacelessnessNot In-Person but Not Impersonal. Pedagogy 23, 2 (April 2023), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-10296042

    2023 doi

  87. [95]

    S Tong and J B Walther. 2011. Relational maintenance and CMC. Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships 53, 9 (2011), 1689–1699

    2011

  88. [96]

    United Nations. [n. d.]. Youth | United Nations. ([n. d.])

  89. [97]

    Monica Vladoiu and Zoran Constantinescu. 2020. Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic: Online Education Commu- nity, Based on Discord. In 2020 19th RoEduNet Conference: Networking in Education and Research (RoEduNet) . IEEE, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/RoEduNet51892.2020.9324863

    2020

  90. [98]

    Welmoed Fenna Wagenaar. 2024. Discord as a fandom platform: Locating a new playground. TWC 42 (March 2024). https://doi.org/10.3983/twc.2024.2473

    2024

  91. [99]

    M White and S M Dorman. 2001. Receiving social support online: implications for health education. Health Educ. Res. 16, 6 (Dec. 2001), 693–707. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/16.6.693

    2001 doi

  92. [100]

    Wikipedia contributors. 2024. List of social platforms with at least 100 million active users. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/List_of_social_platforms_with_at_least_100_million_active_users

    2024

  93. [101]

    World Health Organization (WHO). [n. d.]. Adolescent health SEARO. https://www.who.int/southeastasia/health- topics/adolescent-health. Accessed: 2024-9-4. 29 Woodstock ’18, June 03–05, 2018, Woodstock, NY JaeWon Kim, et al

    2024

  94. [102]

    Amy X Zhang, Michael S Bernstein, David R Karger, and Mark S Ackerman. 2024. Form-From: A Design Space of Social Media Systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05388 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Third Place

    Guo Zhang and Elin K Jacob. 2013. Understanding boundaries: physical, epistemological and virtual dimensions. (2013). 30 Discord’s Design Encourages “Third Place” Social Media Experiences Woodstock ’18, June 03–05, 2018, Woodstock, NY A DEMOGRAPHICS DATA Table 3. Demographics ...

    2013

  96. [105]

    How did you learn about the platform and why did you decide to use it? b

    Do you remember when you first decided to download and join Discord? a. How did you learn about the platform and why did you decide to use it? b. What is it known for amongst your friends? c. What was your first impression of Discord?

  97. [106]

    What do you mainly use it for? b

    How often do you use it? a. What do you mainly use it for? b. What’s your typical session when you use Discord? c. How many servers do you have joined? d. Could you briefly describe each server? Maybe, like how many members there are, what the purpose of it is, etc

  98. [107]

    Can you walk me through your typical experience of joining a new Discord server?

  99. [108]

    How do you make sense of a new server? Its rules, its vibes, the people there, and more

  100. [109]

    Who, what kind, where, when, how, why? b

    Could you briefly describe how your experience has been like making new connections or friendships over Discord? a. Who, what kind, where, when, how, why? b. Is there a specific reason to choosing Discord to make friends, or no?

  101. [110]

    Where and how did you meet? b

    Can you recall any of your typical first interactions with strangers on Discord? a. Where and how did you meet? b. How big was the server or the channel that you both were a part of? c. What element of Discord do you think helped you the most with that experience of meeting so...

  102. [111]

    How do you decide who to develop stronger relationships with? i

    Can you describe your typical experience when you transitioned from being a stranger to becoming friends with someone on Discord? a. How do you decide who to develop stronger relationships with? i. What are some signals that make you decide not to want to develop a connection ...

    2018

  103. [112]

    What features of Discord do you think contribute most to building friendships? b

    Are there any unique aspects of Discord that you think contribute to friendship development? a. What features of Discord do you think contribute most to building friendships? b. How do you use these to maintain and deepen your friendships? c. Are these features available on ot...

  104. [113]

    What might be some hurdles to making friends over Discord, if any?

  105. [114]

    Which platforms were the most effective for you in making and/or developing new con- nections? b

    Which social media platforms, besides Discord, do you use or have used before? a. Which platforms were the most effective for you in making and/or developing new con- nections? b. How does Discord compare to that platform? What’s unique or different about Discord? c. What is y...

  106. [2021]

    Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 38, 10 (Oct

    Connected while apart: Associations between social distancing, computer-mediated communication frequency, and positive affect during the early phases of COVID-19. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 38, 10 (Oct. 2021), 2906–2920. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211041316

    2021 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.