![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldBefore I got involved in Facebook, my friends were grouped together in relatively discrete networks. There was AHTG; there was soc.history.what-if; there was the grand 2300AD complex; there were Livejournalers; there were blogospherics; there were Torontonians; there were others. There was a bit of overlap, one person recruited to another, say, or remarkable accidental connections, but these were exceptional. These circles were separate, and seemed destined to remain separate.
And then Facebook came along and, by virtue of the complete transparency of friends lists, all of these different circles were united. It's been more than a bit interesting to see these people from different networks interacting with each other, whether commenting on my posts or friending each other or joining the same groups. On the one hands, it's nice to see people in your circles interact; on the other, more weakly, it's a bit disconcerting to see the extent of the collapse.
What do you think of all this? Do you think, like me, that this is overwhelmingly a positive thing? Or does the disconcertment of the unification put you off?
Discuss.
And then Facebook came along and, by virtue of the complete transparency of friends lists, all of these different circles were united. It's been more than a bit interesting to see these people from different networks interacting with each other, whether commenting on my posts or friending each other or joining the same groups. On the one hands, it's nice to see people in your circles interact; on the other, more weakly, it's a bit disconcerting to see the extent of the collapse.
What do you think of all this? Do you think, like me, that this is overwhelmingly a positive thing? Or does the disconcertment of the unification put you off?
Discuss.
Tags:
