28
Apr

Thoughts on managing my social network

   Posted by: Greg Schwartz   in Commentary

Before I fulfill the promise of the post’s title, let me update you on my so-called TwitteRetreat. It lasted about three days, during which time I really didn’t check in with Twitter at all. On the third day, I popped in once, remarked on the strength of my compulsion to get back in the ring and left for another day.

The following day, I came across a situation where I needed the counsel of my trusted network. They came through and then some. I knew right then I wouldn’t be able to stay away forever.

So I’ve renegotiated my relationship with Twitter. I’m only following the conversations intermittently, during down times. I’m being more selective about updating my own status. I’m only monitoring direct messages and replies to my tweets. This has allowed me to stay part of the community with far less moment-to-moment commitment. It’s far more manageable and I’ve had little trouble letting go of the things I’m missing and am not trying to catch up on conversations gone by.

Anyway, a situation arose on Friday that I found perplexing and which reminded me that, at the end of the TwitteRetreat post, I’d committed to saying more about how I manage my social networks. I received a friend request on Facebook from someone with whom I was not familiar. Not all that unusual and not something I shy away from.

On both Twitter and Facebook, I have an informal rule that I be conversational with anyone who wants to be part of my social network. Many of you reading this know that already. I want to feel connected in some way to the people who I see in my friends list on Facebook or my followers list on Twitter. It’s really a pretty low threshold for calling two people connected and it usually consists of me sending a message to the requester asking the following two questions: “Who are you? Why follow me?” On Facebook, the second question is “Why be my friend?” This is known affectionately (or otherwise) by some as “The Quiz.” I point out in my messages that these questions are meant conversationally, not curtly. Hard to do much with 140 characters interview-wise.

The responses I get to the questions are varied, but the vast majority of people at least answer. Some people are really appreciative of the message and my efforts to engage. One person told me that they actually respected me more for asking. It is, admittedly, a hoop of sorts, as I’m not interested in people who are just padding their numbers. In every case where the person has responded with something more than “Facebook said we should be friends,” I’ve been able to sustain enough interaction and conversation to consider the person part of my world. The relationship has meaning and context.

And now, back to our story. So I sent this person my usual introductory message, including the quiz. A day or so later, when I was dipping back into Twitter, I noticed the very same person requesting to follow me on Twitter. “OK, this person really wants to engage me,” I’m thinking to myself.

Twitter, unfortunately, does not allow me to direct message someone who doesn’t follow me (which is a good policy to avoid spamming and such, but I’d like an exception for when someone you don’t know is requesting to follow you).* So in order to make an another attempt to chat, I accept the request. And because I always follow people who follow me, I also start following this person at the same time. I send the new follower a direct message saying that I’m going to skip the usual quiz, since I expect to chat on Facebook. No response.

A few days later, I saw that this person was sending out tweets, so I thought I’d make another attempt at interaction. “Hi there. Still haven’t heard from you here or on Facebook. Don’t want to conversate? :-( ” Without directly quoting the response I got, the person essentially said “Not really. Want to save Facebook for real faces. Have had great conversations here.”

Mind you, I’d have taken a conversation in either place, but now this person has done two things: 1. Indicated that, despite seeking great conversations, they don’t want to talk to me. 2. Wasted my time by telling me they want to be my friend, when in fact, they don’t. And why would you ask to friend me on Facebook, if you are saving Facebook for real faces?!?!?!

I was blown away. With Facebook, it’s trivial to ignore a friend request, which was my next move. On Twitter, the situation is a little trickier. In order to attempt conversation, I had to accept this person as a follower. Once it is clear that I don’t really want this person as a follower, I have no choice but to block them. I really hate doing this. I’m sure this is a perfectly nice person with whom I have no interest in creating static. But I don’t want people to be part of my Twitter conversation who aren’t willing to engage me personally. Period. Your approach may be different and that’s great.

This is actually the third person I’ve blocked for similar reasons. When I mentioned this on Twitter, a very interesting discussion emerged. I was asked about how I define my social network and how this compares with my approaches to Flickr or this blog.

Flickr is an interesting case. I actually have no control (to my knowledge) of who adds me as a contact, but I have complete control of which people I consider friends or family members. Most of my pics are only available to friends and family. For someone to be considered my friend on Flickr and thus have access to images of my personal life, I expect to have already established a relationship with them somewhere else, whether it’s on Facebook or Twitter, via the comments on this blog or somewhere out in the real world. Flickr is not, in and of itself, a place where I network. For other people, it is.

And that’s the main point of what has become yet another too-long blog post: everyone has a different idea of where social networking happens and what it looks like. I surely have a different philosophy than most of the people who read this blog. But it’s essential to me that I connect directly with the people that I consider to be within my social networks. It’s the primary element that gives it any meaning at all.

* Jessamyn West has indicated to me that Spaz will allow you to direct message someone who doesn’t follow you, but my attempts to do so were fruitless.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 28th, 2008 at 6:45 am and is filed under Commentary. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

19 comments so far

Brandi
 1 

Okay, this is somewhat related…I have a question regarding who you list on your blogroll. Lately I’ve been seeing pretty long blogrolls out there in the blogosphere. Is this just a vetted list of blogs you like, any blog you found that is on LIS, or a list of LIS blogs you read? It seems this is another place people vary. I know many people who list blogs they don’t actually read regularly but would if they have time. Just wondering how you handled this…

April 28th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Greg
 2 

Great question and one I plan to cover in a future post on things I’ve added to the sidebar (for all the RSS readers who don’t visit the site). That blogroll is generated by tagging feeds in my Google Reader with the LIS tag. So those are the actual feeds in my reader. That’s why it’s kind of a mess with, for example, three feeds for my local library. The podroll are the actual podcast-related feeds that I’m subscribed to in Google Reader, although I do my actual downloading and sync through iTunes.

April 28th, 2008 at 8:58 am
 3 

Hi Greg:

I think you have a very balanced view of your social network(s): you are willing to let in new people, but you want to maintain everything at a level so that you can still connect to people in a way that is meaningful. You maintain a certain level of privacy while still being open. Overall, I think you have taken a very healthy view of it.

A lot of these networking platforms make it easy to “hook up” with people, to the point where I have not kept any spaces specifically for close, trusted friends. Most of my closest friends are not in these spaces, so we connect by email, IM and telephone.

For me these platforms have been ways to build networks, and in some ways that has been a very shallow way to meet people; shallow in the sense that I don’t necessarily engage a lot with everyone in my online network. I do spend a lot of time vetting people who I follow on Twitter. If I am not interested in the person but don’t find them offensive, I let them follow me; if they are just out to sell something or are creepy, I block them. I am a little more selective on Facebook. In that space I prefer it be people who I have either met in person or who I have networked with online elsewhere for some time. I recently took a recommendation on someone I should “friend” on Facebook from another friend; fortunately he had his profile open and I could see that, indeed, we had a lot of professional interests in common so it might be worth connecting.

I currently have 33 friend requests sitting in Facebook and am not sure what to do with them. Some may be Twitter friends who go by pseudonyms on Twitter; at some point I will follow them up.

One point which you make is that we all view our social networks differently. I also think that when we are inside these social networks, especially via Twitter, we are all seeing something different. It is going to depend upon who we are following and how many we are following. If I am mostly following 15 informational news and conference feeds on Twitter, that is very different than following 900 people from around the world with different backgrounds and interests all talking about what they are doing day to day.

Anyway, I appreciate the thoughtfulness you put into your interactions and connections.

Cheers,
Connie

April 28th, 2008 at 10:28 am
 4 

Thanks for your thoughts, Connie. Just today I had another situation involving someone who requested to be my friend, but when I tried to find out more about the person, they shut me out. That just doesn’t compute for me, but it does have a lot to do with how and why that person uses the tools.

April 28th, 2008 at 10:41 am
 5 

Maybe if on Facebook you need to add a little bit more context. Something like “I am interested in adding people to my Facebook friends only if you are interested in engaging in real conversation. To help determine that, I have two questions:…”

Maybe folks on Facebook are just not used to the succinctness we use on Twitter.

April 28th, 2008 at 10:45 am
 6 

LOL, Connie. I actually do send a much longer note in Facebook. It’s evolved as I’ve tried to make it seem less curt and more personable. Apparently, it’s still not a perfect tool.

April 28th, 2008 at 10:47 am
 7 

Greg,
I think the way you handle your social networks makes a lot of sense! You want them to be ’social’, and you want them to be communities for you. I treat mine similarly, but since I am basically a private netizen, I don’t have as many unknown folks trying to connect with me.

I suspect some of the responses you get to trying to establish a real connection come from your status as a ‘public figure”. I’d also assume that’s why you want to create that connection– anonymous connectors can just download the podcast)

This reminds me of the flurry a ways back in the blogosphere from some of the more prominent LIS bloggers about managing their circle of contacts in the shiny new social networks. After reading all of that, I became very hesitant to try to ‘friend’ folks on twitter and facebook who I only knew through their blogs. Even when I had been a regular commenter on those blogs. That was an early motivator for me to start blogging: I felt anonymous and vaguely stalker-esque wanting to ‘friend’ folks (and continue to follow the conversations) who had public lives when I had not revealed much of myself to them.

But other people may be far more comfortable wanting to continue to listen in on a conversation from safe anonymity. And those may be the folks reacting less-than-positively to being engaged by you.

It’s your community. And you have many communities. You get to be the gatekeeper in whatever way(s) make you comfortable. You are publicly visible in a lot of ways, and I would hate if this led you in any way to close that down.

April 28th, 2008 at 11:05 am
 8 

At times, I find twitter overwhelming… I too feel like I have to take a break from it sometimes… but then find that I miss it and end up back on it. In general, I find twitter to be rather time-consuming, but maybe that’s just me…

April 28th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Chadwick Seagraves
 9 

I had started out being very open and adding folks as friends without knowing them. I also sought out folks I did not know in person and have made a great many friends that way.

However, now I am starting a weeding project where I have been eliminating people with whom I have had no interactions recently or with whom I have little in common.

I have kept MySpace for my most trusted friends from High school & college (and a few librarian friends I trust). I use Facebook for professional networking with the others mixed in, and use Twitter for personal & professional interactions. I am much more private on Twitter regarding folks who want to follow me since I actually let more of my “true” self be expressed there.

I appreciate you sharing your philosophies with us and find that I take similar approaches and may adopt some of your attitudes as well. I don’t want to be exclusionist, since I would not have become friends with many of the great folks I know in the library community had they not let me friend them and follow them. However, I have engaged them, and they me, and interacted enough with them in ways that led us to develop relationships online that we have followed up with F2F meetings. It’s a balancing act. :-D

April 28th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Greg
 10 

@Rudy, thanks for the comments. I think what surprises me is that I’m getting that kind of response from people who are reaching out to connect to me. It wouldn’t surprise me at all to get that from people who I was reaching out to. I’ve been slowly reaching out to folks who are fans of the show and am finding about 50% uptake on interacting. Fascinating stuff.

@TBL Me too. That’s why I renegotiated my relationship with it. Had to let most of the conversation go. Was not easy for me, but as it turns out, I value the connectivity too much to let it go completely.

@Chadwick That’s really interesting.

I’m still happy to add people I don’t know. I just want to get to know you and if you’re not willing to enter into that relationship with me, then sorry, no dice.

I want to have enough of a connection with my “friends” that it would be difficult for me to weed them. So instead of weeding them, if I hadn’t heard from them in a while, I’d drop them a line and try to reconnect.

I may end up weeding Twitter though. Since I’m not following the conversation as closely, I’m not feeling the same level of connectedness with some folks that I might otherwsie have. Not yet though.

I maintain a cautious balance between openness and privacy everywhere on the web. I lock down my Tweets because I want my network to be filled with people willing to engage, not because I have anything to hide. If I did, I wouldn’t be sharing it on Twitter, locked down or otherwise. But I understand (and appreciate) how you approach it differently. Thanks for sharing your thoughts about it.

April 28th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
 11 

[...] had been percolating, percolating, percolating. . . and then I read Greg Schwartz’s post on Managing His Own Social Network.   In it, he describes how he offers a quiz to people who request being his “friend” [...]

April 28th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
 12 

Ha — the reason I e-mailed you via the Unvocab site earlier today was because I thought you wouldn’t see the question if I posted it on Twitter!

Your post reminded me of a dear friend from high school whom I found on Facebook recently; she wouldn’t friend me because she only uses FB to connect with family members…

April 29th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Greg
 13 

Well, you would probably have been right, Jason. But I will see @planetneutral messages eventually. DMs come to my inbox, so I see them immediately.

April 29th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
 14 

[...] received a number of interesting comments in response to my post on managing my social networks. I’ve received feedback in the comments here, on Twitter, via IM, in the LSW Meebo chat room [...]

April 30th, 2008 at 6:35 am
 15 

[...] population believes that because an individual or an entity participates in open conversation that their entire business should be openly accessible. The two — open and accessible — are not synonymous (open access image by Ron [...]

May 5th, 2008 at 12:08 am
 16 

[...] “their entire business should be openly accessible” part links to my Thoughts on Managing My Social Network post. Taken at face value, I think that’s a mischaracterization of what I was saying. So my first [...]

May 5th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
MegvsMeg
 17 

Thanks for the post. It’s interesting to see how other people treat these kinds of media, because often I (mistakenly) assume that they approach them the same way I do.

I decided to follow you over Twitter because I saw your part in the Pecha Kucha at CiL, and because I’m always curious about what smart people are thinking and doing (whether library-related or not). I treat Twitter very casually, though, not a conversation (or a quiet “hanging out in a shared space”) in the way that IM or a chatroom is to me. I don’t even use Twitter to converse with my best friends (with a few exceptions), but rather to read what they are up to.

I do use it for professional purposes (which I don’t do with Facebook or MySpace), because in Twitter feeds, people mention names and terms and posts that I might like. I don’t currently have a professional blog, nor read most professional blogs (probably to my detriment, but hey, we all make choices). So Twitter is how I learned about LSW, for example.

Honestly, I probably won’t engage you in this medium, at the conversational level that you seem to appreciate. I am also probably less engaging, in the other sense of the word, as my posts have devolved into commenting on book titles and IM reference questions, but also rock shows and soda pop.

Because I treat Twitter so casually, though, I don’t really mind if people block me (not a hint, but just so you know). I think it’s a little different in my case, because I choose who to get active updates from (in gchat) and who to survey occasionally from the Twitter site.

I am probably way-overthinking this.

May 7th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Greg
 18 

@megvsMeg Thanks for your comments.

Here’s the thing: You’ve already been engaging me, both in the Meebo room and now here on this blog. You’ve already demonstrated a willingness to interact, which is all I’m really asking for in return for my opening up my tweets, profile, etc. to you. The conversation need not take place in Twitter. Platform preference is not important to me.

What I don’t want is to look at my followers list and see a bunch of people that I can’t even place or whose names I don’t actually know. That does nothing for me.

I have no problem with people using Twitter differently than I do. I expect it. I’m “eccentrically counter-cultural” in my usage. With Twitter, I get requests from people with whom I have no previous context. And if I’m going to let you into my world, I need context.

I don’t think you’re over-thinking nearly as much as I probably am. :-)

May 7th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
 19 

[...] at Computers in Libraries but has continued online (of course). The conversation kicked off with Greg Schwartz’s post, but I’ve come across a few other librarians who have picked up on this thread, including, [...]

May 27th, 2008 at 7:24 pm