<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Social network snobbery</title>
	<atom:link href="http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/2008/10/28/social-network-snobbery/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/2008/10/28/social-network-snobbery/</link>
	<description>A blog by a Brit about Web 2.0, the Internet and technology in general.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:19:02 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nils Geylen</title>
		<link>http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/2008/10/28/social-network-snobbery/comment-page-1/#comment-377942</link>
		<dc:creator>Nils Geylen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:09:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/?p=917#comment-377942</guid>
		<description>The problem is that it seems hard to maintain a somewhat highbrow image for these sites. Facebook certainly did lower its &#039;standards&#039; - whatever those were or what you think of that. But LinkedIn too has moved decidedly towards a less &#039;boring&#039; or at least less &#039;business-like&#039; approach and has added many features, not in the least the blogging applications.

I suppose that in order to gain the greatest reach, you have to target the greatest common factor. And we all know that is a reader/membership with the intellectual powers of a 12-year old... The highbrow, elitist, challenging web, I fear, will have little impact. It&#039;s like the Times Literary Supplement: it&#039;s got style, but who reads it, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem is that it seems hard to maintain a somewhat highbrow image for these sites. Facebook certainly did lower its &#8217;standards&#8217; &#8211; whatever those were or what you think of that. But LinkedIn too has moved decidedly towards a less &#8216;boring&#8217; or at least less &#8216;business-like&#8217; approach and has added many features, not in the least the blogging applications.</p>
<p>I suppose that in order to gain the greatest reach, you have to target the greatest common factor. And we all know that is a reader/membership with the intellectual powers of a 12-year old&#8230; The highbrow, elitist, challenging web, I fear, will have little impact. It&#8217;s like the Times Literary Supplement: it&#8217;s got style, but who reads it, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rashbre</title>
		<link>http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/2008/10/28/social-network-snobbery/comment-page-1/#comment-367892</link>
		<dc:creator>rashbre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joeanderson.co.uk/blog/?p=917#comment-367892</guid>
		<description>True - In my case LinkedIn and Plaxo are more biz contact related whilst the others (FB MS etc) are more casual. Your descriptions fit well with my own experience too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True &#8211; In my case LinkedIn and Plaxo are more biz contact related whilst the others (FB MS etc) are more casual. Your descriptions fit well with my own experience too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
