by Eric Ward

Remember the tale “Village Wine”, where nobody thought their little bit of wine would be missed from the village festival?  Then nothing but water poured forth from the cask on festival day. Social link spam is a similar thing in reverse. My few social self-diggs etc. wont affect things, so why not?

My position on this topic may be misunderstood. I have no problem with making it easier to encourage socializing. After all, this chiklet here ->  is a form of it. 

But what I see is a lack of discretion as to what should and shouldn’t be socialized to any given social venue. If someone socializes a press release about a new dry cleaners web site in Duluth, it’s sort of silly, and nobody gets hurt (or dugg :), but to me it’s the pollution of the commons, noticed or not. The logic behind it is also funny, if a bit ironic.  "Since this will never become popular I can go ahead and submit it to social network sites that seek to identify what's popular..."  Huh?

I’ve been guilty in the past of silly socializing, and I do understand that one man’s spam is another man’s headline news (Hey, I’ve been looking for a dry cleaners in Duluth!!!)

My position today is social spam is not going to kill the social golden goose, but the goose does bring out the worst of the spammers, and for me that’s like people who toss “only one” cigarette butt out their car window and think it doesn’t make a difference. 

It does.

Link well my friend,