friends, Friends & FRIENDS
Written by on Friday, May 30, 2008 – 6:46 am -ReadWriteWeb had an interesting post yesterday exploring one’s social graph and how many friends are too many. It is a very good post and has some very good data around what the maximum size of a social circle should be and there are great examples of different ways society forms around that size.
This is all fine and good for how social circles form off line, but what about online? Take a quick look at any social network site and you quickly see that there are plenty examples of people who have social circles 10x the size of what is considered to be the maximum manageable size. So it begs the question, are your off line social circles defined differently than your online social circles and do the two overlap?
I am a firm believer that there are three classifications of online social circles, and they consist of different types of people. For arguments sake, I will call them all friends (however to me, calling someone a friend is something that I do not take lightly, I hold that title for those that are close to me). So with that, the three types of online “friends” are as follows:
- friends
- Friends &
- FRIENDS
I know, I know, what the hell does all this mean? Trust me, there is some method to my madness. To me, friends are those people that you know online, but have never actually ever had any off line interaction with. Think of this as people you follow on Twitter because they are someone of interest in the industry, but you do not actually know them, have never met them, but because we (the people of the industry) like to label people as friends, they are by default a friend of yours but you do not actually know them. The second classification (according to me) are Friends. These are the people you know online, have had some personal interaction with, but not on a regular basis (like you don’t meet up with them on Fridays for Happy Hour). Finally, there are FRIENDS. This is the group that most likely consists of your off line friends that are online. This group could also consist of those Friends that over time you have gotten close to, but do not interact with them off line on a regular basis due to geography.
Now this is just one mans view on how social circles are comprised, so due take it with a grain of salt (or you take take it as the law, that would be fine by me too 
).
Posted in Opinions, Web Community |
Will Kern's take on business, startups, life and everything in between. This blog is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you are going to get.
May 30th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Good explanation!
May 30th, 2008 at 10:53 am
@cody,
Thanks, glad you like my break down
May 30th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Pretty much the only thing psychologists agree on is that there are different classifications for different types of friends.
It’s interesting that you point out the idea of in-person capital as instigating a more meaningful relationship, because that’s exactly where the future of this research is going. What effect does in-person capital have on a relationship that previously only existed in the wired? In 5 years we may have the answer!
May 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
@calinazaret,
It is a huge pile of a mess that no one really has the answers to, so I put my best answers forth ;-).
It will be interesting to see what the research you mentioned concludes….
May 30th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Wow, nice posting so Informative.
June 2nd, 2008 at 5:57 pm
I couldn’t agree more with your groupings.
I would just add I really enjoy two other scenarios…
- an offline friend starts to suddenly become active online (poor n00bs)
- a friend becomes a Friend over a few beers, meetups, conferences, etc.
Here’s to more friends becoming FRIENDS!
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:07 pm
@Todd,
Your two additional groupings are spot on, the first one is funny and I have a few of those ;-).
And I second you on more friends becoming FRIENDS!
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
I think the definitions and categories can also vary based on the social network. For example, I used to habitually reciprocate my random Twitter followers with a mutual follow, but my Twitter feed quickly became too cluttered to be useful or productive. I’ve since stopped that practice (but I don’t mind the followers). On the other hand, I’m a big Linkedin user, and I’m constantly looking to add new people to that network.
There’s no slight intended by not reciprocating with a follow, add or whatever. I think you just have to find the right mix of friends/Friends/FRIENDS that works for you in a given setting.
Now, I’m going to go send you a Linkedin invitation.
-Michael
June 3rd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
@Michael,
I am the same way with Twitter, I do not mind the followers at all, but those that I follow is about 1/3 the amount. The LinkedIn example is a good example of how my definition may not hold up exactly, and it is a network that I would say I have more friends and Friends than I do FRIENDS.
FTR, I have accpeted your invitation
Will