I'm getting all the time flamed, accused of trolling when I talk about Socialmedia. Maybe it's my mediterranean mood, or just me not expressing what I really mean in a clear language. So let me try to clear this.
When talking about Social networks, people often refer to others defined as "A-Listers", those that are famous enough to dict what's worth attention. IMHO it's not about A-Listers, it's about personal interests first. We people should be described by our interests (profiling data here, things like APML serve the purpose greatly). My interests, my profile, is my very thing! I can, and of course want to share it, but it's up to me to define this first. Then I connect to people, not by their status, but by interests and things that gather us.
Let me give you an example, and tell me if I'm wrong in thinking so. Back in the late 90's and the begining of 2000 we've seen many people blogrolling people like Zeldman, when they're actually not in web stuff, sometimes don't even know what are standards, what is CSS or even HTML, moreover they simply don't care of this techy stuff.
This is what I call "corruption" or "perversion", in that sense that the inner-person gets so corrupted by the environnement that it forgets what most imports to it. And this implied some strange behaviors in people's interractions that we've all seen. So, should we blame it on the people or on the tools?
I think that tools are guilty too.
I have a dream —yes, me too :) that we people will be seen by algorithms and programs as clouds of interests, first and then nicknames, names, pictures and all that stuff. I really believe that online, I am, what I like and my friends are those I physically know or those who share the same interests with me :)
P.S. Some of you will easily understand that I like this Coltrane guy
