“More people are blogging. That’s really cool. Now one thing to make sure of is that people can easily find out who you are from each of your posts. Simple things like your name. Sometimes hard to determine.”
A conversation cropped up in the #indieweb slack about how wide its adoption currently was. It surprised me to learn that there were, at most, around 10,000 sites that could currently be described as indieweb properties.
In reply to:
When I rebooted the blog last year I aspired to the goals of the indieweb but wasn’t yet familiar with the #indieweb movement. I knew I wanted ownership of what I was doing but hadn’t filled in the fine details.
One of the biggest issues facing us on the web is identity. Who are we or, perhaps more accurately, who does the web think we are?
We have become an amalgam of usernames, email addresses and profiles, and who we appear to be depends on which instance is being viewed.
Details emerged recently of a new social network called Gab rapidly growing in popularity – no big deal you may think, new social ventures appear (and usually die shortly after) all the time. In fact, the news has gone quiet just as quick.
A discussion earlier got me thinking about Twitter now allowing people to request verification of their accounts.
I wasn’t going to submit an application as there are more well known Colin Walkers out there – from footballer and manager to cellist – but hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained and I am verifying that I am me!
Any gamer who has created and played the same character for any length of time will tell of the attachment they have for it, they can’t help but get invested emotionally.
“Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification, which will result in most users naturally clicking on the top (verified) results. The true cost of remaining anonymous, then, might be irrelevance” – Eric Schmidt.
The desire to influence can lead us to tailor our behaviour to what appears popular and so the influencer becomes the influenced.
Is it time to forget the numbers game in favour of a more meaningful measurement of our social influence and should this be service specific?
When I wrote “The 3 R’s of Influence” I suggested that the true measure of influence is a combination of reach, reputation and relevance.
There are some arguments that won’t go away and that over the value of social media seems to be one of them.
Sarah Lacy over at Techcrunch has suggested that those complaining about how the social web does or doesn’t work are actually using it incorrectly. She has received a varied reaction and, while I may not see eye to eye with the full post, I would be inclined to agree that some have lost sight of what they set out to achieve on the social web.