[Sigia-l] Web 2.0 99% bad

[Andrew Boyd]

On 5/16/07, Katie Ware <kcoleware at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> However this article lumps both creation AND viewing of UGC as the same thing. "One-half of Online Users Are Either Readers or Creators." I would hope the report would split the activities out, since I think the model of more are passive participants and fewer are active participants holds with UGC (as is also stated iin the Businessweek links below)
>
> - Katie

Hi Katie,

interesting :)

Straw poll: how many people on the list read blogs on a daily basis
and do not themselves blog? I am not sure that we can speak of social
computing and Web/Enterprise/Business 2.0 without thinking about
participation.

Apropos participation as a percentage of total population: when you
write for some external publication, who are you writing for? Is it
the 95% of the people who don't get your work and never will, or is it
the 5% or less who do, or at least get it enough to pay your salary
and act as your peers? This isn't elitism, it is just the way it is -
content without context is piffle, and only those with context (be it
IA or stamp collecting) will find it valuable.

And while I am making grand pronouncements: the references to
generational specificity and MySpace seem a bit strange - most of my
social computing is done via Tangler and LinkedIn, where I interact in
the main with GenX and Boomers.

Cheers, Andrew

---
Andrew Boyd
http://facibus.com/facibusreviews