/ / Facebook, Twitter and superficiality

Facebook, Twitter and superficiality

Laurel is…… finding Facebook a little superficial. Yes humorous with funny little groups and quick grabs of conversations but ultimately unsatisfying. Hard to get passionate, involved, committed when all discussions are about this long. Twitter is bunches worser though… Laurel is…… off to play World of Warcraft. Talk later. Technorati Tags: social networks, Online Communities,…

Laurel is…
… finding Facebook a little superficial. Yes humorous with funny little groups and quick grabs of conversations but ultimately unsatisfying. Hard to get passionate, involved, committed when all discussions are about this long. Twitter is bunches worser though…

Laurel is…
… off to play World of Warcraft. Talk later.

Similar Posts

2 Comments

  1. I do not get twitter. I am busy and just don’t need any more distractions.

    I like Facebook for what it is. Fun, irreverent and easy to use. Some of my blogging friends use it and it is a good way to communicate.

    Some of these social networking sites, you have to wade through multiple sites to get what you want. Facebook is pretty intuitive.

  2. Me too! I prefer Facebook to Twitter although I find Facebook’s interface clunky and layout cramped. But once you realise that it’s a profile on steroids, that becomes ok.

    People like to communicate in three ways and with 3 styles. They are: one-2-many, one-2-one, many-2-many. And synchronous, asynchronous and hybrid (RSS). Examples are: email and instant messenger (one-2-one and a/synch), blog and broadcast (one-2-many and a/synch) and the final two are forums (or virtual worlds to be groovier) and IRC. hybrids are anything choose to pull in instantly or else wait. twitter is one I guess.

    The best social networks offer the full range of services so that each individual can create and consume content in the way they want to whom they want, in a ‘time’ they want. Or else they offer one and do it really really well. 🙂

Comments are closed.