What BrightKite Does Well

BrightKite allows for a granularity of “friend” adding that I appreciate. I can add someone. I can add them as a TRUSTED friend, which means they get even more private info. And then from there, I can send their updates to a stream, to my phone via SMS, or to my email account. As social networks pile upon social networks, it’s time for you to start paying attention to the features that we’ll really need. Here’s a need:

I need for networks to start realizing a delicate social situation. It’s important that I accept people who know me from my blog and twitter as “friends” on a network, while still keeping them in the “small f” category of my life (until they grow into being more). Facebook doesn’t allow this. Hell, with Friend Suggest, it’s almost the opposite lately. I’m adding six-twelve new people a week that I don’t know, but presume I know from my blog or twitter or my friends.

What else do we need? We need a persona/profile that displays different values depending on the network. A service like ZLoop has an interesting service. They allow one to make several personas from one account, such that you can be a business version of yourself, a church version of yourself, and a friends version of yourself, or whatever versions you need to support.

What do YOU need in a social network platform these days? What tools do you need for the way you WANT to do work on these networks? You can start asking, you know. They need to start differentiating soon. It might as well be with your recommendations.

Screen caps made with Skitch

ChrisBrogan.com runs on the Genesis Framework

The Genesis Framework empowers you to quickly and easily build incredible websites with WordPress. Whether you're a novice or advanced developer, Genesis provides you with the secure and search-engine-optimized foundation that takes WordPress to places you never thought it could go.

With automatic theme updates and world-class support included, Genesis is the smart choice for your WordPress website or blog.

Find out more about the framework features
Check out the Genesis demo and the wide variety of child themes
See example designs in the Genesis design showcase

Become a StudioPress Affiliate

http://www.industry-report.com Ricardo Bueno

My all-time favorite has been LinkedIn because it’s clean & to-the-point. Little spam and it’s a great way to stay in touch professionally with that group of people that you want to maintain contact with. But…as networks expand I definitely agree that it becomes important to differentiate one group of contacts from the next (who you’ve met and where & the extent of your relationship). It sounds silly, but these things are important!

Though FB is nice because you can interact informally, it’s difficult to keep up with everyone! Sure you can mass mail everyone an update or a greeting, but where’s the personal interaction in that?

I hesitate to try other social applications like Naymz but hey, if this will get your organized, why not give it a shot?
http://www.industry-report.com Ricardo Bueno

My all-time favorite has been LinkedIn because it’s clean & to-the-point. Little spam and it’s a great way to stay in touch professionally with that group of people that you want to maintain contact with. But…as networks expand I definitely agree that it becomes important to differentiate one group of contacts from the next (who you’ve met and where & the extent of your relationship). It sounds silly, but these things are important!

Though FB is nice because you can interact informally, it’s difficult to keep up with everyone! Sure you can mass mail everyone an update or a greeting, but where’s the personal interaction in that?

I hesitate to try other social applications like Naymz but hey, if this will get your organized, why not give it a shot?
http://www.industry-report.com Ricardo Bueno

My all-time favorite has been LinkedIn because it’s clean & to-the-point. Little spam and it’s a great way to stay in touch professionally with that group of people that you want to maintain contact with. But…as networks expand I definitely agree that it becomes important to differentiate one group of contacts from the next (who you’ve met and where & the extent of your relationship). It sounds silly, but these things are important!

Though FB is nice because you can interact informally, it’s difficult to keep up with everyone! Sure you can mass mail everyone an update or a greeting, but where’s the personal interaction in that?

I hesitate to try other social applications like Naymz but hey, if this will get your organized, why not give it a shot?
http://www.thoughtgadgets.com Ben Kunz

Chris, right on. Today we have what seems like a million different social media tools, yet each treats all of my contacts as the SAME pool of friends. You, my mom, my blog readers, my boss, my wife, my clients, my college friends are all on one mass level.

What I really want is fewer social media tools, and for each to allow me to segment friends. Sure, I’d like a handful of tools with discrete functionality, say text (Twitter), email, funk (Facebook), publishing (Blogger), and distribution (Digg). But there is no way that you should be in the same mass pool with my high school buddy … at least, not yet man.

The deep irony is that with all this social media innovation, we are still treating everybody the same. Feels a bit like mass media.
http://www.thoughtgadgets.com Ben Kunz

Chris, right on. Today we have what seems like a million different social media tools, yet each treats all of my contacts as the SAME pool of friends. You, my mom, my blog readers, my boss, my wife, my clients, my college friends are all on one mass level.

What I really want is fewer social media tools, and for each to allow me to segment friends. Sure, I’d like a handful of tools with discrete functionality, say text (Twitter), email, funk (Facebook), publishing (Blogger), and distribution (Digg). But there is no way that you should be in the same mass pool with my high school buddy … at least, not yet man.

The deep irony is that with all this social media innovation, we are still treating everybody the same. Feels a bit like mass media.
http://www.thoughtgadgets.com Ben Kunz

Chris, right on. Today we have what seems like a million different social media tools, yet each treats all of my contacts as the SAME pool of friends. You, my mom, my blog readers, my boss, my wife, my clients, my college friends are all on one mass level.

What I really want is fewer social media tools, and for each to allow me to segment friends. Sure, I’d like a handful of tools with discrete functionality, say text (Twitter), email, funk (Facebook), publishing (Blogger), and distribution (Digg). But there is no way that you should be in the same mass pool with my high school buddy … at least, not yet man.

The deep irony is that with all this social media innovation, we are still treating everybody the same. Feels a bit like mass media.
http://egosphere.blogspot.com pieter

I’ve been thinking a lot about how normal social interactions might be defined with regard to information sharing between people. Off course how social networks handle this is of great interest to me.

Relationship types (and the mutual sharing of profile data) seems like a recurring theme in social network applications. Differentiation and ‘definition’ of the relationships you have is a basic social phenomenon. However, in my opinion most social web applications (even the ones allowing you to create different groups) have treated the concept of ‘friends’ exactly the wrong way around.

Most sites allow you to designate a relation (usually just ‘friend’, ‘co-worker’, ‘family’ etc) and based on that those people get to see more or less of your profile. This is exactly the opposite of what happens in our daily lives.

In real life, you start out with an initial level of disclosure towards some person, usually just your name and profession maybe. After that, the relationship might grow, and more (two way) disclosure follows. If all goes wel and neither of you causes a trust problem, then at some point you have a friend relationship. With other people such as colleagues, the (again two way) sharing of information doesn’t move beyond a certain point (i.e. no details about private personal things are shared).

So, to sum up; it’s not the relation ‘tag’ that determines what you share, but it’s what you share that determines the relation you have.

For social applications it follows that there is actually no need to explicitly name relationship types (friend, co-worker etc), but granular profile sharing should be implemented. Off course grouping your contacts every which way you want is still very useful, but it’s not strictly based on relationship types. (I could decide to group my contacts on an entirely different basis). Moreover, when grouping is based on predefined relationship types, a person can be only in one group at the time. Not likely in real life either.
http://egosphere.blogspot.com pieter

I’ve been thinking a lot about how normal social interactions might be defined with regard to information sharing between people. Off course how social networks handle this is of great interest to me.

Relationship types (and the mutual sharing of profile data) seems like a recurring theme in social network applications. Differentiation and ‘definition’ of the relationships you have is a basic social phenomenon. However, in my opinion most social web applications (even the ones allowing you to create different groups) have treated the concept of ‘friends’ exactly the wrong way around.

Most sites allow you to designate a relation (usually just ‘friend’, ‘co-worker’, ‘family’ etc) and based on that those people get to see more or less of your profile. This is exactly the opposite of what happens in our daily lives.

In real life, you start out with an initial level of disclosure towards some person, usually just your name and profession maybe. After that, the relationship might grow, and more (two way) disclosure follows. If all goes wel and neither of you causes a trust problem, then at some point you have a friend relationship. With other people such as colleagues, the (again two way) sharing of information doesn’t move beyond a certain point (i.e. no details about private personal things are shared).

So, to sum up; it’s not the relation ‘tag’ that determines what you share, but it’s what you share that determines the relation you have.

For social applications it follows that there is actually no need to explicitly name relationship types (friend, co-worker etc), but granular profile sharing should be implemented. Off course grouping your contacts every which way you want is still very useful, but it’s not strictly based on relationship types. (I could decide to group my contacts on an entirely different basis). Moreover, when grouping is based on predefined relationship types, a person can be only in one group at the time. Not likely in real life either.
http://egosphere.blogspot.com pieter

I’ve been thinking a lot about how normal social interactions might be defined with regard to information sharing between people. Off course how social networks handle this is of great interest to me.

Relationship types (and the mutual sharing of profile data) seems like a recurring theme in social network applications. Differentiation and ‘definition’ of the relationships you have is a basic social phenomenon. However, in my opinion most social web applications (even the ones allowing you to create different groups) have treated the concept of ‘friends’ exactly the wrong way around.

Most sites allow you to designate a relation (usually just ‘friend’, ‘co-worker’, ‘family’ etc) and based on that those people get to see more or less of your profile. This is exactly the opposite of what happens in our daily lives.

In real life, you start out with an initial level of disclosure towards some person, usually just your name and profession maybe. After that, the relationship might grow, and more (two way) disclosure follows. If all goes wel and neither of you causes a trust problem, then at some point you have a friend relationship. With other people such as colleagues, the (again two way) sharing of information doesn’t move beyond a certain point (i.e. no details about private personal things are shared).

So, to sum up; it’s not the relation ‘tag’ that determines what you share, but it’s what you share that determines the relation you have.

For social applications it follows that there is actually no need to explicitly name relationship types (friend, co-worker etc), but granular profile sharing should be implemented. Off course grouping your contacts every which way you want is still very useful, but it’s not strictly based on relationship types. (I could decide to group my contacts on an entirely different basis). Moreover, when grouping is based on predefined relationship types, a person can be only in one group at the time. Not likely in real life either.
http://www.collectivex.com Clarence Wooten

Chris,

What about a concept of not having friends at all… but defining trust based on groups… and having dual profile personas (social & professional) that you display depending on the nature of the group that you’re communicating, sharing and networking with?

Yes.. this is a plug.. I’ve just described what CollectiveX does. I felt the need to mention it based on this post. Social networks are very friend-centric… and not very group-centric. CollectiveX-powered Groupsites are 100% group-centric, so defining levels of friendship isn’t necessary. The group defines the context and you decided how much of yourself you want to share based on that context and your level of trust in the group.

Try it and let me know what you think. So far it seems to be working… over 14,000 groups of all types and sizes have setup Groupsites powered by the CollectiveX platform. Not a single friend has been defined ;-)
http://www.collectivex.com Clarence Wooten

Chris,

What about a concept of not having friends at all… but defining trust based on groups… and having dual profile personas (social & professional) that you display depending on the nature of the group that you’re communicating, sharing and networking with?

Yes.. this is a plug.. I’ve just described what CollectiveX does. I felt the need to mention it based on this post. Social networks are very friend-centric… and not very group-centric. CollectiveX-powered Groupsites are 100% group-centric, so defining levels of friendship isn’t necessary. The group defines the context and you decided how much of yourself you want to share based on that context and your level of trust in the group.

Try it and let me know what you think. So far it seems to be working… over 14,000 groups of all types and sizes have setup Groupsites powered by the CollectiveX platform. Not a single friend has been defined ;-)
http://www.collectivex.com Clarence Wooten

Chris,

What about a concept of not having friends at all… but defining trust based on groups… and having dual profile personas (social & professional) that you display depending on the nature of the group that you’re communicating, sharing and networking with?

Yes.. this is a plug.. I’ve just described what CollectiveX does. I felt the need to mention it based on this post. Social networks are very friend-centric… and not very group-centric. CollectiveX-powered Groupsites are 100% group-centric, so defining levels of friendship isn’t necessary. The group defines the context and you decided how much of yourself you want to share based on that context and your level of trust in the group.

Try it and let me know what you think. So far it seems to be working… over 14,000 groups of all types and sizes have setup Groupsites powered by the CollectiveX platform. Not a single friend has been defined ;-)
Pingback: Brightkite Wants to Win the Mobile Social Network Battle + Invites for Readers - BuzzYA!
http://shegeeks.net Corvida

I'm late with this comment, but I think that in addition to what you've suggested Chris, they should also start looking at recommending those already IN our networks. The last grows everyday and people get lost in the process of connecting all the time.

I'd love to know the following:
- When I've recently “re-connected” with someone via a message or replying to their content
- Who I haven't talked to that has tried to contact me
- Who I've tried to contact that hasn't responded to me
- Recommend users for certain groups based on keywords or tags
http://shegeeks.net Corvida Raven

I'm late with this comment, but I think that in addition to what you've suggested Chris, they should also start looking at recommending those already IN our networks. The last grows everyday and people get lost in the process of connecting all the time.

I'd love to know the following:
- When I've recently “re-connected” with someone via a message or replying to their content
- Who I haven't talked to that has tried to contact me
- Who I've tried to contact that hasn't responded to me
- Recommend users for certain groups based on keywords or tags
http://www.edhardyukshop.com/ ed hardy

supra shoes
supra footwear
supra sneakers
radii shoes
radii footwear
cheap supra shoes
supra shoes sale
supra

visvim
visvim shoes
visvim shop
visvim online
visvim sneakers

Nike Air Max
Nike Air Max Shoes
Air Max Classic
Cheap Nike Air Max
Air Max Shoes
Air Max Trainers
Nike Griffey Max
Buy Nike Air Max

supra skytop
supra skytops
supra skytop shoes
cheap supra skytop
supra skytop high
supra vaiders
supra vaider
supra vaider shoes
cheap supra vaider
supra vaider low
supra vaider low shoes
cheap supra vaider low
supra skytop II
supra skytop 2
supra skytop ii
supra skytop 2 shoes
cheap supra skytop 2
supra skytop III
supra skytop 3
supra skytop iii
supra skytop 3 shoes
cheap supra skytop 3 shoes
supra tk society
supra tk society shoes
tk society
supra tk
supra tk shoes
supra tk society sale
cheap supra tk society
supra society
supra society shoes
cheap supra society
supra society sale
supra skytop women
womens supra skytop
supra skytop for women
supra strapped ns
supra strapped ns shoe
supra strapped ns shoes
supra strapped
strapped ns shoes
supra soprano high
supra soprano high shoes
supra thunder
supra thunder shoes
supra thunder high top
radii 420 top
radii footwear 420 top
radii 420 top shoes
radii 420 top lifestyle footwear
radii straight jacket
radii straight jacket shoes
radii straight jacket sneakers
radii straight jacket lifestyle footwear
radii strangler
radii stranglers
radii strangler shoes
radii strangler footwear
visvim christo
visvim christo sale
cheap visvim christo
Visvim Christo 2010
Womens Visvim Slippers
Womenâ€™s Visvim Slippers
visvim slippers
visvim fbt
cheap visvim fbt
visvim fbt shoes
visvim fbt shop
visvim fbt sneakers
visvim f&i laboratory
visvim free international laboratory
visvim hockney
visvim hockney shoes
visvim logan lattice
visvim logan lattice shoes
nike match classic hf
nike match classic hf shoes
ed hardy
ed hardy clothing
ed hardy t shirts
ed hardy uk
ed hardy accessories
ed hardy swimwear
christian audigier
cheap ed hardy
ed hardy womens
ed hardy womenâ€™s
ed hardy women
ed hardy mens
ed hardy menâ€™s
ed hardy men
christian audigier womens
christian audigier women
christian audigier womenâ€™s
christian audigier mens
christian audigier men
christian audigier menâ€™s
christian audigier accessories
ed hardy bikini
ed hardy bikinis
ed hardy swimsuits
ed hardy skirts
ed hardy skirt
ed hardy womens hoodies
ed hardy hoodies for womens
ed hardy boots
ed hardy bottoms
ed hardy women bottoms
ed hardy tank
ed hardy tanks
women ed hardy tanks
ed hardy womens shorts
women ed hardy shorts
ed hardy womens tee
ed hardy tees for women
ed hardy womens underwear
women ed hardy underwear
ed hardy womens shirt
women ed hardy shirts
ed hardy womens jeans
women ed hardy jeans
ed hardy womens suits
women ed hardy suits
ed hardy womens shoes
women ed hardy shoes
ed hardy womens long sleeve
ed hardy jacket
ed hardy jackets
ed hardy mens hoodie
ed hardy hoodie for men
ed hardy mens jeans
ed hardy jeans for men
ed hardy mens long sleeve
ed hardy long sleeve menâ€™s
ed hardy mens shirt
ed hardy shirt for men
ed hardy mens shorts
ed hardy shorts for men
ed hardy mens underwear
ed hardy underwear for men
ed hardy slipper mens
ed hardy slipper for men
ed hardy swimwear mens
ed hardy swimwear for men
ed hardy mens shoes
ed hardy shoes for men
ed hardy mens t shirt
ed hardy t shirt for men
ed hardy bags
ed hardy belt
ed hardy belts
ed hardy hats
ed hardy caps
ed hardy sunglasses
ed hardy watches
ed hardy purse
ed hardy purses
christian audigier bikini
christian audigier bikinis
christian audigier swimwear
christian audigier swimsuits
christian audigier bottoms
christian audigier womens hoodies
christian audigier hoodies for women
christian audigier womens long sleeve
christian audigier long sleeve for women
christian audigier skirt
christian audigier slipper
christian audigier sandals
christian audigier suit
christian audigier suits
christian audigier women t shirt
christian audigier tanks
christian audigier men hoodies
christian audigier hoodies for men
christian audigier jacket
christian audigier jackets
christian audigier jeans men
christian audigier jeans for men
christian audigier men long sleeve
christian audigier long sleeve for men
christian audigier mens shoes
christian audigier shoes for men
christian audigier shorts for men
christian audigier mens shorts
christian audigier men tee
christian audigier tee for men
christian audigier bags
christian audigier belt
christian audigier belts
christian audigier caps
christian audigier jewellery
christian audigier sunglasses
http://www.savetubevideo.com youtube downloader

I need for networks to start realizing a delicate social situation. Itâ€™s important that I accept people who know me from my blog and twitter as â€œfriendsâ€ on a network, while still keeping them in the â€œsmall fâ€ category of my life (until they grow into being more). Facebook doesnâ€™t allow this. Hell, with Friend Suggest, itâ€™s almost the opposite lately. Iâ€™m adding six-twelve new people a week that I donâ€™t know, but presume I know from my blog or twitter or my friends.

What BrightKite Does Well

ChrisBrogan.com runs on the Genesis Framework

YOU WANT to grow your business?

Most Recent Blog Posts:

Be Open to Inspiration

Do Local Businesses Deserve Your Money?

Why Use These Outlier Social Media Tools?

Can You Work at Being Fearless?

Sponsored Post – Mobile Productivity and the Future

Supporters: