So, this was supposed to be done by yesterday, but then I came up with the post I did write yesterday and felt I had to write it down before I lost it. That happens to me often. To top it off, I was confused on the days all week and thought I had another day to do this. But, I saw on Karen's twitter feed that she is getting some sleep before posting, so maybe I can squeeze this in. If not, that's okay, I wanted to do it anyway.
This week's topic has to do with online friends. Karen asks:
Weekend Assignment #258: In the online world, the word "friend" has become a verb. We "friend" or we "follow" people on social media sites and blogs, often forming casual connections with people we would be unlikely ever to meet face to face. Do you extend your arms wide to the online world, collecting lots of online acquaintances, or limit your web interactions mostly to "real" friends?
I certainly don't have a wide net of online friends. I don't belong to many online groups. I have this one here, and Carly's photo shoot as my only online groups. That's fine with me. If I had too many, I'd have trouble keeping track of everything I'm supposed to be doing. I have enough trouble getting to every one's posts the way it is now.
I do follow others on Twitter, and their blogs, that I don't know, but even that is relatively small. I think I follow 55 people on Twitter. Some I 'know,' most I don't. I follow people that I think will be interesting, funny, or a combination of those.
Now, because of that, my readership is pretty low. That's okay with me. Would I like more? Sure, but that might also invite some stalkers, or crazy people, you know? It's funny, I think about once every few days I'll get an e-mail saying I have two more followers on Twitter and by the time I get to look at their profile, the account has been suspended. That cracks me up for some reason. I wonder if the "Twammers" (I didn't make up that word) really get much out of Twitter. I can't imagine they do.
I am on Facebook, too. For the most part, those are people that I know 'in real life.' A lot of them are former classmates from some era in my life. But, while it's fun keeping in touch with them, I don't find Facebook as fun as blogging. Or, as fun as Twitter for that matter. I don't have my Twitter feed update my Facebook account, I'm not sure why. For some reason I want to keep the two worlds separate. I know, it's weird.
Extra Credit: Have you had much online interaction with people from other countries?
Not a whole lot, really.
6 comments:
I'm your weirdo knitting semi-lurker, aren't I? *L*
I like that you're more focused on who YOU follow on Twitter, and not so much on who - or how many - is following you.
And I think blogging is more fun than Facebook, too. I'm glad there are still a few of us around :-).
I'm glad you did this, Mike, even if a little late. Now I've got to hunt you down on Facebook (I may need a hint), even if it's not your fave source of online interaction. I'm having the same issues you are in making the rounds and readership. To be honest, I must admit that FB had contributed to my recent laxity in blog-jogging.
My latest follower on Twitter is the Pima County Health Department. I can't imagine what I might tweet that would be relevant to them.
Cookie: Lurker is okay; stalker is not. :)
Florinda: the funny thing is, right after I posted this two spammers started following me. But, at the same time, the guitarist from Twisted Sister did too. Weird. :)
Karen: Yeah, FB can suck up your time. I play the bowling game, and Mafia Wars a lot. :) Thanks for letting me turn this in late!
I'm not on any of the networking sites and I still don't grasp the whole concept of Twitter (I sound like I'm 80...lol). The best I could do was blog and even that's gone to hell. :)
DC: Okay, grandma. :) Actually, I think you might like Twitter if you try it. Come on, all the cool kids are doing it. :)
Post a Comment