Social NOTworking

In late December, 2008, a friend asked for my input on a social networking concept. It's a great idea; someday we may pursue it. While evaluating its place in the universe, I was astonished at how bad most social networking sites appear to be. Wow. What a wasteland! I grabbed a snapshot as I went along.

Rediscovering my research in June, 2009, I revisited the sites to see how much had fallen to rot and attrition in six months. As we might expect, few sites got better; several got much worse; most lie mouldering.

• I just looked around for a little while -- there is nothing scientific about this survey!
• I could have found dozens more; this sketchy, random list is not intended to be complete!
• I'm sure you know another site you LOVE or HATE -- but you don't need to tell me about it!

Feel free to poke comments into Steve Yost's cool QuickTopic

Remember, as always: if you blink, don't blog.

UnBlinking scans the wealth of information on the internet, gathering background on people and events. Using public search engines, UnBlinking collates what may be known (and what may have been forgotten). [Usability note: All links open into the same target window.]

Don't Date Me Because I'm Beautiful  

This survey is all about first impressions. In some cases, I know much more. For example, one dating site -- OKCupid -- is not visually impressive, and has a rather average-looking membership. But, it's one of the best sites internally, technically. They upgrade features regularly, pay attention to user comments, and keep the profiles and forum pages healthy. People network there a lot.

OTOH, some very flashy looking sites are essentially zombies -- dead from the neck up. Half the profiles are bogus, features have been broken for weeks or months... the owner may not still be alive! So, do NOT be surprised to be surprised by what's behind the home page.

Finally, in the "Judging A Book By Its Cover" category, expect the unexpected. After months of low-yield searches at e-Harmony, Match, Chemistry (and others that shall remain nameless ;-), I found myself just goofing around on a "non-dating" site. I took the same approach in my profile and messages -- but met women who were much more interesting, and more open to relationships. Go figure.

Aye, Aiiie! I, Eye of the Beholder

Here's the key for my review, in the table below. Note that a few true "Dating" sites slipped in, jumbled up in online lists of social networking sites. If something changed noticeably, you'll see both my 20081226 and 20090610 notes. I've highlighted a few table cells with great or revealing pointers.

Column 1: Clickable link. You understand that, right?

Column 2: First Impression. Literally; I did a very brief review. This is a one-word, snap judgment based on design and profiles from the home page (if any). These words are relative within the survey: FaceParty is more douchebaggy than Face-Pic, which is more Cryptic than Faces, which is cluttered. MOST of these sites are douchebaggy, cryptic, and cluttered; some are more blatantly so than others.

Column 3: Active. The reported number of members logged in at the moment I visited -- very few sites admit this. Large sites, like MySpace or MyYearbook, may not want to reveal the relative flux from hour to hour (it bleeds too much marketing data). Small sites freak out about admitting you're there all alone.

Column 4: Members. The reported number of members, total. Please note two huge caveats. First, some sites are really a network of sites (FriendFinder is one example). Thus, everyone who joins any of their sites -- Adult, German, Gay, Senior, Christian, Filipino -- all appear in that "Member Count," but you'll never see 99% of their profiles. (Nor would you want to! :-) Second, many sites keep zombie profiles "alive" indefinitely. Profiles frequently have been inactive for months or years -- or never had any content.

Column 5: Likely Audience. Another First Impression, based in part on the choice of language, and featured profiles.

Column 6: About Us. A direct, characteristic or revealing quote from the site's own "About Us" or home page.

Column 7: Notes. Whatever else you need to know, or I can't resist saying. Yeah, I'm a little oldskool, but if you enjoy sites packed with disturbing images, and people, and language, and music , why are you reading this at all?!?