Social networks: attempts to reflect

Social networking is an unpredictable thing. Who could say that this would end when the forums began to appear? But it was they who created the social networks, uniting the first communities by interests and simply by sympathy (and sometimes by territory, and sometimes by appearance). There were no blogs, but it was already possible to speak. There was no “broadcasting into the void”, as it sometimes happens with blogs, but for your thoughts you could be banned.

So, we are developing, and now a new communication mechanism has emerged, which can easily become not just a mechanism, but an infrastructure.

However, along with all the charms of this phenomenon, there are some drawbacks.
')
1. There is a sharp cultural stratification. People in the first, second, and even third circles of community A (with a high culture and a narrow area of ​​interest) are unlikely to be interested in a community of Be (with a culture of medium and wide range of interests).
Moreover, both communities will not show interest in the Ve community, whose members do not differ in culture as such (low level of culture and interests of the broadest without consequences for the interested party).
The intersection of these communities will give several nodes where some interaction will take place; This is undoubtedly: since I know Vasya, and Vasya knows Tanya, and she communicates with John, who writes to Kim's blogs, carefully reading and commenting on the Masharathi blog ...

2. The length of chains leads to the fact that the value obtained as the product of the number of chains of communication by the number of people in the chain (if the chain branches, then each branch is an additional chain), significantly exceeds the population of the planet.
Conclusion? Someone is participating in several chains simultaneously.
The second conclusion? Community overlap.

Conclusion third? Stratification is inevitable.
Some write better, others worse. Some are able to properly defend the point of view, others immediately spit saliva. It is clear that extremes are attracted - and we get at one pole of people who cannot write, rearing because of the slightest comments “not theirs”, and around these people there is a community smoothly changing to the other pole - people who can write, able to calmly and correctly discuss and carefully study reasonable criticism of opponents.

The whole sign of division will be that - regardless of these characteristics, one will be, WHAT to write about, and the other will not. And this will be the boundary point of separation. no matter what your style, text, presentation is - you have something to say. And there is a community.

Nothing to say? You remain in the void.

The worst division that I can only imagine is some in companies, others ALL by one.