Sometimes you just need a little guidance.

Over the lifetime of Upoc, our subscribers have formed more than 40,000 groups. The topics have ranged the entire spectrum of human experience, from dating to religion, sports to politics, and everything in between. The question is, with so many options available, how does a new subscriber to the service get started? Where do they go? It can all be somewhat intimidating, similar to a kid moving to a new area and starting at a new school.

We decided that we needed some safe, friendly and familiar places for new subscribers to start within Upoc. Similar to a welcome mat. So, we started themed highlighted groups. This process began in the fall with groups for Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukah, Kwanza and New Year's. The response was overwhelming. Members flocked to these ready-made and monitored groups. Our customer service staff was very diligent in making sure these groups stayed on topic. The big win was that a large percentage of the group members in these themed groups had recently joined Upoc. Just like the first student who reaches out to the stranger in the school lunchroom to show him the way, these guided themed groups provide a familiar safe haven for new users to start to interact on common topics: "What are you giving thanks for on Thanksgiving?" "What do you want from Santa Claus this year?" and much more.

Web 2.0 is all about user-generated content, and Upoc has been at the forefront of this long before it had a catchy name and was considered universally cool. The purist would say, "Create the platform and let the users decide how it is used and provide the content." What our experience has found is that an unaided Web 2.0 environment can be somewhat foreign and scary to newcomers. Web 2.0 needs a friendly atmosphere and a way to ease users into the full freedom that they can enjoy in this new realm of social networking. Providing themed and monitored groups is one step in making Web 2.0 a more welcoming experience for the masses.

The name on my locker was “Spence.” My coach did not know my real name! He had to ask me so they could print the program for the upcoming games. The other players on the team all had their own “team” names: “Moose,” “Sparky,” “Mole,” “Mud,” “Scooter,” “Sticker,” “Blade,” etc.  It was the persona we each adopted within our social network.

Years later when I played “beer league” hockey, we had a social network that would have only existed in the context of creating a team. The team had some corporate types like myself, blue- collar construction workers, several criminal defense lawyers, and many of their clients! This was a collection of 18 guys that would never network together in “real life.” Like my college team, we only knew each other by our team nicknames. We played together for almost 15 years and won 12 championships.

The years we lost were when some players violated probation! After each season we invited our wives or girlfriends to an end of year dinner. This dinner was always an interesting exercise in social networking. As you can imagine, the female companions of the team members had about as much in common as the players, but easily bonded around the topic of men chasing a small frozen piece of rubber around cold, damp arenas.  My wife always got frustrated when I would introduce her to the other players. The reason was simple – I did not know their real names!! It was always, “Hi, Dear, this is 'Stinky'; 'Stinky,' this is my wife" and “Dear, this is bone-crusher ...."  and she would reply, “Hi, Mr. Crusher!” This group was very tight in the context of ice hockey, but once the season ended, so did our association.  No context equals no social networking. That is the lesson I learned.

Many of today’s social networks have an explicit (such as LinkedIn) or implicit (Facebook) networking context. With a context that is understood by its members, a social network has longevity. If you remove that context, the network will cease to exist. If a network forms (like my earlier comments about CB radio) around a weak context, then the fade will become big, then die.  

My hockey network had context that bonded the group. When the context was removed, that social network became a collection of nice memories, and a few trophies.

Here is the list:

Immediate family, extended family, school friends, religious network, sports team members, high school friends, college friends, work colleagues, business networks, and neighborhood friends.

One observation I made was that the number of active social networks was at the highest and potentially most volatile in my teen years and early 20s. These are the social networks that set the foundation for adulthood. How I related to each social network was slightly different. 

Sometimes the social network would define who I was, and sometimes the opposite was true. Even the name I was (am) known by in the different social networks varied.

 The obvious example are: Steve (Parents and Family), Dad (Kids) and Spence (School, High School and College Friends).  

Thinking about Web 2.0 in real life social networking terms yielded me an epiphany. You can imagine how difficult it is in anyone’s teen years to be labeled and categorized within a particular social group. The virtual social networks are a way out of that dilemma for teens. They permit high school and college students to take more direct control of defining who and what they are. 

It allows them to redefine themselves at will. It grabs control from the mass network at large and creates a better sense of ego. It is no longer the roll of the “in crowd” to define the social network and status of others. 

The virtual social networks are the great equalizer in the social status game. This is a game that is most important to high school and college age students.  

Next installment is the most interesting social network I ever belonged to …

How many social networks are you a member of?

There are two perspectives you can use to answer this question. You can answer the question by number of commercial virtual social network services: AIM, MySpace, Friendster, Dada, LinkedIn, Upoc, Blogger, Match.com, etc. The second perspective to answer this question are non-electronic (i.e., traditional) social networks: friends, family, schoolmates, church or synagogue members, work colleagues, etc. 

My question is what is the intersection of the virtual with the real?

In my view, when real connections are reinforced with electronic social networking, the bonds of both are stronger. How often does this happen? We have seen many examples of real social groups using Upoc as a social networking tool. That is, a tool for facilitating already existing relationships (church groups, teams, work groups). This is mobile Internet technology facilitating the real world. We have seen many companies form Upoc groups to coordinate staffers at conventions; sales teams use text group messaging for pricing information; and teams have used the service to send scheduled information.

One trend we are now seeing is families using group messaging within the family calling group to communicate via text.

As social networking crosses the chasm to become the facilitator of traditional social networks, its already significant usage will explode by many orders of magnitude. This is a good thing for all the players in the market of social networking.

In my next installment I will share some interesting social networks I have belonged to and what they taught me about the nature of this new medium that everyone is buzzing about.

There are several reasons why the CB radio phenomenon died out. Here are my top reasons and why they relate to today’s big social networks:

The stated motivation for entering the social network was not consistent with the activity of the network. Uh? Let me explain. Most people bought into the commercial promotion that the CB was a safety and security device. You could somehow contact help if you broke down on a lonely deserted road. Help was just a “breaker, breaker, good buddy, please save my butt!” call away. So, you would tell your friends and family, “I’m getting this to be safe!” 

Of course that was a total lie.

The CB was a social networking toy! You could play at creating and honing a new persona every time you pushed the transmit button. You could be Southern (which was the favorite, especially of Northerners, or you could be "the boss" or the man "the man"). Women were treated with equal status (especially if they knew the 10-20 of "smokey and his camera"). While there were no doubt illegal or immoral activities, the norms of the community and the total openness of communication served as a self-regulation. It gave the user of CB radio freedom to be however they wanted to be. It was the first mass social network with anonymous communication that created its own social norms.

The times that I actually discovered who I was really talking to, well, became kind of boring.

The main usage as a social networking device let to that need being more powerfully filled by the explosion of instant messaging in the late 1980s and 1990s. Social networking was no longer limited to 5 miles of random road, but the whole world. 

Strike One for the CB  

The consumers who actually used the CB because of safety reasons probably discovered that relying on random strangers to help you in your hour of need is as likely to bring “bad guys” as it is “good guys” to your rescue. Another device was now being marketed as the safety device you should have in your car – the mobile phone.  The mobile phone is of course a social networking device with one-to-one precise communication. It was better to call the AAA to fix your car than rely on “Cruisin' Cougar,” “Lusty Lady,” or “Bandit Eye.”

  Strike Two for the CB

 The CB Social networks were random and without context other than you were traveling somewhere and didn’t want to get a speeding ticket. This is not the form of social networking that creates “sticky” bonds. No one really grew attached to their “Good Buddies.” It was rare that you would find the same person twice, and if you did, it could just be another person with the same handle. In general, you did not care – no context means no passion about a topic and no ties amongst the members. Thus, when alternate means of random social networking emerged, or safety devices became available, there was nothing underneath all the hype of the CB craze to sustain it. 

 Strike Three for CB.

 Some more thoughts on today’s social networks in my next installment.