Social networking sites are like nightclubs?

[randomness]

marginaleye, referencing the MySpace to Facebook to Google+ trend: "I fear, however, the horrible possibility that social networking is going to be a perpetual treadmill of pursuing the 'in crowd' and fleeing prole drift, stretching out from here to infinity."

Well, it is how clubbing seems to go. Some dance clubs do last a while, but the crowd does seem to follow the trendiest new place. So there is some social precedent here.

I suppose if one was creating a social networking site one might keep that particular dynamic in mind.

Comments

[bloodstones.livejournal.com]

Good goth clubs, however, often have a lot of staying power and a dedicated following. How's fetlife doing?

[jab2.livejournal.com]

win! (yay goth clubs)

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

How's fetlife doing?

From all I hear, reasonably well. It's not just goth clubs, either. I think clubs which serve a niche can last quite a long time. This is probably good news for ravelry, for example.

But the general audience clubs seem last a lot less long, and those are much more like the Six Degrees/MySpace/Facebook/Google+ of the world.

I wonder if someone's going to come up with an equivalent to raves.

[bloodstones.livejournal.com]

So, a social networking site that specializes in discussing, sharing, and selling drugs, OONTZ, and blinky lights?

Also, I agree about the niche markets. Still goth related, but isn't that how the ceos of hot topic figured out that their perfect market was suburban malls?

[st-rev.livejournal.com]

Some are like nightclubs, some are like bars.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I've often compared Dino to a neighborhood bar, with a very tight-knit group of regulars.

[jab2.livejournal.com]

and yet, fewer of my friends have to use earplugs to survive a night on a social networking site.... :)

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Just wait until the social networking sites start adding full-sensory capability as a cutting-edge differentiating feature!

(Earplugs are just a good idea.)

[dpolicar]

If I were creating a social networking site, I would design it with a distributed open-access data model, such that people could create and use new apps/front ends without needing to "migrate," and could adopt a best-of-breed approach across multiple apps without having to keep recreating the social network data.

[serendipity9000.livejournal.com]

I find it exhausting to even think about checking ANOTHER place for updates. Honestly, I currently find LJ the most pleasant to read.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

This is a reason why I'm posting to dw with crossposts to LJ.

[vvalkyri.livejournal.com]

this is my problem, too. i have g+, and i certainly like its interface better than FB, but I basically got as far as sending out a few invites. agh.

[dirque.livejournal.com]

Both FB and google+ is about the ease of finding and adding people. LJ assumes they'll find you if they really try.

While I don't think Google+ is a winner- their graphic design is atrocious- it always lacks that final polish. I think it's good enough to destroy the one social network to rule them model. To me G+ is too much like FM calculator watches.

It tells time! It calculates! I can listen to the radiooooooo.

But is it something grandma would use?

[miss-chance.livejournal.com]

What perplexes me in this quote is why this is a "horrible possibility." It's socializing. Socialization has flow and change. What's the big deal? Why is is this bad in any way?

[marginaleye.livejournal.com]

It's a horrible possibility because it's a lot of work because re-creating one's online profile, re-connecting with everyone, learning the quirks in each new system, and shuffling everybody onto the correct side of one or more filtration mechanisms (Circles, Friends lists, and so forth) takes time and energy.

Socializing, moreover, isn't a happy self-sustaining, self-rewarding thing for introverts. It's work. You may know, intellectually, that it's important for one's mental heath and crucial to social success, but it's still... work. It's like eating nutritious vegetables whose taste you don't really like, or like dragging yourself to the gym even when you're not really in the mood for it.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

I'm glad marginaleye spoke up, because I really can't speak about his concerns, but I can talk about mine.

My problem with "social networking sites" isn't with the "social" or socializing part of the phrase, it's with the "networking site" part. I'd rather the flow and change wasn't in the application but in the socialization itself. All of the networking site overhead gets in the way of my actual socializing, and each additional networking site is more overhead.

And for what, really? To make yet another group of rich businessmen richer through my social network? Seems like a great deal for them.

All in all, I don't personally think it's horrible--I'm an extrovert, so this stuff comes easy--but I certainly find the proliferation of networking sites irritating, particularly as it's fairly clear that social networking sites are being rolled out because they're the IPO flavor of the year.

So I open accounts and park my name in them in order to make sure that people can reach me, set up forwarding to my email address, and then I wait to see if there's anything useful going on. Ever since Facebook I've been posting less and less in each new social networking site that opens. At some point I imagine the venture capitalists will move on to the next big thing.

I hope that's made my point of view a bit less perplexing.

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

Sounds like we need a social networking system which has an infinite number of alternative sectors. Then one can engage in the infinite cycle of moving to a cooler sector while fleeing the less-cool who have arrived at one's current sector.