Thanks for the thoughtful responses. I'm happy to see that so many of
you chimed in. For the record, I don't believe frivolity is an
entirely negative thing. It has a natural place in our lives and is a
useful component of our social structure.

Mike Myles, I certainly never said that the entire history of written
word is frivolous. That would have been ridiculous. If you read my
post, you'll see that I am talking specifically about online social
interaction a la Facebook and Twitter.

Erika Hall, I loved what you wrote about how online connections can
help keep relationships going: "Knowing with varying degrees of
synchronicity about all little things my friends are doing all over
the world is a really lightweight way to keep the relationship going,
so that when something "hard or weighty" comes up, the bonds are in
place."  Great point! I agree and find this very useful.

Fred Beecher wrote that he's seen tweets from people who've gone
through very serious things and that he appreciates the online
openness "[Twitter] has allowed me to make friends out of contacts and
encouraged to me to interact with people as a whole person, not just
as a fellow UX designer."

Andy Polaine wrote: "Most of our face to face conversation is gossip
and gossip nurtures social bonds and structures."  BTW, Andy, your are
100% right that "there's a problem with 'doomed to frivolity' in the
framing of the question." (I confess, I worded it precisely that way
to provoke strong responses.)  I agree with your assertion that
frivolity doesn't necessarily mean lack of meaningfulness or social
usefulness.

Joshua Porter, the fact that Stephen Heywood was NOT  announcing his
worst days on Twitter is precisely the point I was trying to make.
Rather than broadcasting across his existing social networks, he used
a separate space (http://www.patientslikeme.com) where he shared the
difficult, personal details of with a small set of other folks like
himself.

This is similar to the sad story that Grandin Donovan shared. While a
childhood friend languished in a coma for a month and then died, there
was a Facebook group (a smaller subset of the person's "friends") but
also a semi-private group on Carepages.com. Grandin, I'm sorry that
you lost a friend and I'm glad to hear that online interactions helped
you through the active grieving.

Ethan Smith, I think you hit the nail on the head with this sentence;
"Broader social nets will
perhaps lean toward lighter topics - and more closed ones will tend to
allow people to open up." This rings true because it mirrors
interaction in real life. Both of the stories Joshua and Grandin
shared seemed to support this as well.

The theme in most of the posts on this topic is that knowing what a
far off friend had for lunch may, at first blush sound trivial, but
the fact that the person is sharing what's on her radar with me helps
us both feel connected. The connection is not trivial therefore the
bits of info that help us maintain a link are important as well, even
if they are usually more light-hearted or playful than serious.
Playfulness is wonderful part of human nature.

Thank you all for such insightful posts!

Kind regards,
Angel Anderson
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [email protected]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to