I have no idea who you are. Just came across this post from a tweet of a tweet of a tweet. But you sound cool. Wanna be my friend?
Yikes! I guess I am just one of the millions out there still looking for more validation by the number of people following me. LOL :-) Thanks for the great insight. I have to call my virtual shrink now. Bye. :-)
Aaron Brazell
· 1 year ago
ROFL... Sure, I'll be your friend :p
andrew_feinberg
· 1 year ago
Call me a doomsayer (hell, I've been called worse) but I think the real peril in *chokegag*social media (I still hate that term) is the redefinition of "friendship" as some sort of socio-economic-political capital. People will go out of their way and work hard to build relationships, real life ones on top of the online ones (the people I have worked with in "meatspace" are the ones I find I can converse with best on social platforms).
But there is an asymmetry at work, because even if you are "friends" with someone and have worked with them, they still may have more capital than you, and it becomes hard for the karma that exists in real life relationships to work itself out. This isn't because people are egotistical or evil or jerks (well, some are, but they will flame out and die), but because the sprawling nature of communications doesn't let them have time or resources.
And some people just aren't good at keeping up with the volume of individual correspondence from "friends," either, no matter who they are.
Bottom line is, you're right about one-to-one relationships being the important ones. But it needs to be emphasized that when they become inherently unequal or don't allow for reciprocity, one should step back and evaluate the strength of "social media" for relationship building, and as you have, maybe use their email and phone more than their friendfeed.
It's one thing to be "fed" your "friends." It's another to have to proactively maintain your relationships,
Foolery
· 1 year ago
With any of the social media I have used, there is a honeymoon. It's an exhilarating time, and I am energized by the connections. This fades -- in some media more quickly than in others -- until eventually I may abandon the medium altogether. There are only so many glitter graphics and digestive tract reports a girl can handle, you know? The one constant has been my blogs, because I have complete content control, and there are NO glitter graphics.
And only a few lower G. I. reports.
-- Laurie @ Foolery
p.s. For full disclosure, I follow you on Twitter. How's your digestion?
chelpixie
· 1 year ago
"For my part, I’ve spent less time engaged in all these things and more time in one on one relationships. I haven’t read my Google Reader in over a month. I get on twitter and Friendfeed in small spurts. I don’t go to DC for as many social events as I used to."
This sounds like me. I swear I'm not being anti-social.
Should it be all about being personal?
I'm not sure. I know it's a lot of personal. I enjoy connecting with the people that I do, helping them, sharing information, and really just the friendships that develop. I would miss it if it weren't possible. I'm an addict yes, but to something that adds value to my life. When does value reach it's tipping point?
Erica
· 1 year ago
So. Should I unfollow you? I'll be honest with you. I see Twitter as a way to maybe "spark" more personal relations with people playing in the same space. When it doesn't work out- or those people don't see me as someone worth following back- I unfollow, because then it's clear there's no give-and-take. What would really make a difference would be if everyone would unfollow those well-known interneters (Not necessarily the 250, but maybe the 2500) that give each other follow-backs.
One thing I noticed when I joined Twitter a few weeks ago was that everyone has the same faces on their follows -the confused-looking guy who looks like he's saying "huh", the girl who's yelling through her hands, the green and black aquatic animal, the girl eating a lollypop, the brother with the glasses, the sly-looking woman who got fired for blogging at work (I <3 her, actually) and on and on. As a newbie, I thought I needed those people, too. But, let's unfollow those folks! I will if you do! *grin*
Actually, I have put a hiatus on following people that I don't know personally or have had some contact with. Doesn't mean I have to meet them in person, but I'm more inclined to follow someone like you who comments on my blog than just any old joe that follows randomly. I am in no hurt for followers as I get 20-30 new ones per day. Unless there's a personal investment there though, I don't bother. If anything, I'm following *too* many people now. :)
JessieX
· 1 year ago
I noticed that I was enamored with certain social media -- Facebook and Twitter, in particular -- when I felt I had a connection to the people in my sphere. I felt the early adopters were engaged and interactive. As more people started using said tools for their own reasons, and my volume of friends went up, I found my interest flagging a bit. I tried -- valiantly, but only for a while -- to keep my FB friends below the magical 150 mark, but that was near impossible, and I've given up on that strategy.
I think FB has done a better job, of late, in allowing me to turn up or down volume on people and by reducing the friend feed activity. I find in FB, it's the one-on-one comments and status updates that interest me the most. Twitter, to me, is much more of a living, breathing organism. I have to follow and unfollow people based on their impact on my whole network. More than once I have un-followed someone whose tweet content I like and whose person I like, but whose *impact* on my Tweet feed I didn't like, e.g. massive tweeting and pushing out other people's tweets.
Anyhoo, I find that much of the value of social media is, interestingly, developing and strengthening the skill to navigate a shifting terrain. Does that make sense? It's not so much about social media being perfect. And a perfect static tool. I experience that it's very much about a dynamic interaction with a community of people and that I have to be aware of the changes in the community, changes in what I want and then to adapt, in real time, so that the social media tools continue to work for me. As much as the environment of each tool changes, with new people coming in, old timers slowing down their posts and such, my own interests fluctuate, and I'm the one that has to make the tool work for me ... all while being in relationship to the dynamic world of others, and their relationships, at the same time.
Thoughts on a Saturday morning. Have a great time at BWE08. See you at Dobbin Starbucks soon.
Julie
· 1 year ago
I think that the term "friend" is being re-defined to be more of the "acquaintance" type of meaning. A true "friend" will lend you money when you need it and listen to your troubles, and offer to help. Not many "internet" friends will do that. Come to think of it, nowadays pretty much no one anywhere will do that. I think that our world is turning into a big dung heap where it is everyone is out for themselves, we're all "frenemies" nowadays!
All Comments
Yikes! I guess I am just one of the millions out there still looking for more validation by the number of people following me. LOL :-) Thanks for the great insight. I have to call my virtual shrink now. Bye. :-)
But there is an asymmetry at work, because even if you are "friends" with someone and have worked with them, they still may have more capital than you, and it becomes hard for the karma that exists in real life relationships to work itself out. This isn't because people are egotistical or evil or jerks (well, some are, but they will flame out and die), but because the sprawling nature of communications doesn't let them have time or resources.
And some people just aren't good at keeping up with the volume of individual correspondence from "friends," either, no matter who they are.
Bottom line is, you're right about one-to-one relationships being the important ones. But it needs to be emphasized that when they become inherently unequal or don't allow for reciprocity, one should step back and evaluate the strength of "social media" for relationship building, and as you have, maybe use their email and phone more than their friendfeed.
It's one thing to be "fed" your "friends." It's another to have to proactively maintain your relationships,
And only a few lower G. I. reports.
-- Laurie @ Foolery
p.s. For full disclosure, I follow you on Twitter. How's your digestion?
This sounds like me. I swear I'm not being anti-social.
Should it be all about being personal?
I'm not sure. I know it's a lot of personal. I enjoy connecting with the people that I do, helping them, sharing information, and really just the friendships that develop. I would miss it if it weren't possible. I'm an addict yes, but to something that adds value to my life. When does value reach it's tipping point?
I'll be honest with you. I see Twitter as a way to maybe "spark" more personal relations with people playing in the same space. When it doesn't work out- or those people don't see me as someone worth following back- I unfollow, because then it's clear there's no give-and-take. What would really make a difference would be if everyone would unfollow those well-known interneters (Not necessarily the 250, but maybe the 2500) that give each other follow-backs.
One thing I noticed when I joined Twitter a few weeks ago was that everyone has the same faces on their follows -the confused-looking guy who looks like he's saying "huh", the girl who's yelling through her hands, the green and black aquatic animal, the girl eating a lollypop, the brother with the glasses, the sly-looking woman who got fired for blogging at work (I <3 her, actually) and on and on. As a newbie, I thought I needed those people, too. But, let's unfollow those folks! I will if you do! *grin*
Inciting Revolution,
Erica
http://twitter.com/cosmicgirlndc
personally or have had some contact with. Doesn't mean I have to meet them
in person, but I'm more inclined to follow someone like you who comments on
my blog than just any old joe that follows randomly. I am in no hurt for
followers as I get 20-30 new ones per day. Unless there's a personal
investment there though, I don't bother. If anything, I'm following *too*
many people now. :)
I think FB has done a better job, of late, in allowing me to turn up or down volume on people and by reducing the friend feed activity. I find in FB, it's the one-on-one comments and status updates that interest me the most. Twitter, to me, is much more of a living, breathing organism. I have to follow and unfollow people based on their impact on my whole network. More than once I have un-followed someone whose tweet content I like and whose person I like, but whose *impact* on my Tweet feed I didn't like, e.g. massive tweeting and pushing out other people's tweets.
Anyhoo, I find that much of the value of social media is, interestingly, developing and strengthening the skill to navigate a shifting terrain. Does that make sense? It's not so much about social media being perfect. And a perfect static tool. I experience that it's very much about a dynamic interaction with a community of people and that I have to be aware of the changes in the community, changes in what I want and then to adapt, in real time, so that the social media tools continue to work for me. As much as the environment of each tool changes, with new people coming in, old timers slowing down their posts and such, my own interests fluctuate, and I'm the one that has to make the tool work for me ... all while being in relationship to the dynamic world of others, and their relationships, at the same time.
Thoughts on a Saturday morning. Have a great time at BWE08. See you at Dobbin Starbucks soon.