I think Eric's response explains exactly why the numerous Ning sites that popped up have essentially died. Why go to several different networks, narrowly defined, when you can reach all your contacts in one large network? I built two Ning groups, and joined several others. The individual sites were singularly devoted to my various interests (libraries, technology, inventors, caving, writing, etc.) It turned out that all those folks were on Facebook so I just connect with them there. What's interesting is that there is cross-pollination between the groups, as Dana points out. One of my Second Life NASA friends is also a caver and a poet. Who knew?
---- Eric Scoles <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think I understand what you're trying to say, because what I'm > hearing you say is that Facebook is not useful for networking with the > creators of speculative arts. That's demonstrably false. > > Metcalf's Law would support the analysis that a larger network of contacts > would enhance the value of your sub-networks. So a network of creators of > speculative arts is enhanced in value to the extent that it interconnects > with networks of people having other interests -- say, cats. And that's > before we even think about the fact that people have multiple interests. For > example, I enjoy both speculative arts and reading about social theory. > > Then there's the question of attention economy -- see Dana's response, > below. We have finite attention to devote to these enterprises. Some of us > are better at juggling it than others, but from my perspective, while it's > not precisely a zero-sum game, some of the same rules apply: Time I spend > networking on MyOuterSpace is time I don't spend doing something else. A > more inclusive networking venue allows me to use my time more efficiently, > and (if Bob Metcalf was even partially right) enhances the "value" of my > network by creating a denser net of connection. > > I would argue that more isolating networks, like MyOuterSpace.com actually > degrade value by creating isolated networks that aren't very richly > connected with other networks. > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:12 AM, delancey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Well, I'm the worst guide on these things, but maybe I represent some > > tiny demographic, and I must disagree. I never understood Facebook. > > It looks to me like a crappy web site software -- kind of like AOL- > > make-your-own-website! I stay away from it from fear that students > > will bomb me with friend requests. But this thing is actually for > > something besides telling people when I eat lunch or displaying > > pictures of my cat; the purpose is to network with creators of spec > > arts; that's attractive to me. (There's an equivalent thing in > > academe, called Academia.com; I don't use it much at all, but > > apparently some academics do.) So I signed up.... > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
