The web is often seen as a cobweb. In the idea of cyber-utopians this web is perfect, perfectly connected in an architecture of points and lines without smudging. A web of salvation in which thrives freedom, democracy and peace, and an internet as a weapon to shoot down any dictatorship, despotism and bring freedom. This spider is actually far from perfect. Its lines are all different lengths, jump and many links are imprecise. The idea that "the web spreads knowledge" - which in itself is also true - collides with our inadequacy in defining the new ways of the structure of knowledge, knowledge, and research information. Who consider Internet a hope or a threat, everyone can not agree on the principle that truth and knowledge are essential to civil meetings open and reasonable those who disagree with our opinion. The web is full of network nodes. A drop of water that rests can be seen as a distorting lens that threatens to make us look that node huge and decisive in the entire network, even when it is absolutely peripheral and marginal. Being in that node, with that drop on him, transforms our perspective on the entire network, and worse still makes us believe that "we" are "the" knot relevant and essential. David Weinberger in "The intelligent room" warns the "eco rooms" where deployed only (or mainly) users who feel the same way: "We must beware of psychological traps room echo, that lead us to believe that our beliefs are "obviously" true, letting slip into their extremes " From this concept, we will talk about "stupid room," and I will try to outline like being locked in a room echo produces effects further involventi. What remains in the "room stupid" is only a dual instinct individual within the group of eco: maximization of its position and emerge as a subject agreed with the prevailing view, within a community behaviorally conditioning, in a context substantially closed between people who will still work together on other events later. The room stupid makes us feel safe, in a protected environment among people who think like us, provided you give up something in terms of "intelligence", in doubt, endorsing our position and opinion to the dominant one, in the certainty that "the group" will move the same way. It is an instinctive process, not rational, conscious or preordained. However, deprives us of the analysis of the subject, of points of view on the problem and the solution, and essentially ceases to be "a group that discusses" to become "not a place for sharing and dissemination passive and uncritical of the message." By analyzing a particular case, the behavioral dynamics and communicational of a small group, and the dynamics of a story, we will face the choice of such means and paths should follow the communication and the effects of the indiscriminate use "any means", and what happens if a room becomes stupid "policy adviser" and if "policy" follows the advice of the room stupid. Index La Stanza Stupid The case How was the story -first part As could be addressed if The social-self-perception How was the story - part two Elements of analysis of the message Elements of analysis of the medium used The groups and social networks The analysis of the message The feedback on the strategy applied by the "sender - striker" The feedback on the strategy applied by "receiver - attacked" If the atomic falls into the hands of the rooms stupid If the policy relies on the room stupid (the time that Rosi Bindi chose to be John Foster Dulles) Conclusions and inefficiency
