If I was a deeper thinker, I’d wonder if there really was something culturally significant about people seeming to need so many “friends” these days. Ego gratification for the popular? Sense of belongingness for the unpopular?

-mpg,
who is nonetheless sure Grant would loan him a cup of sugar if asked

http://thenonbillablehour.typepad.com/nonbillable_hour/2009/05/ten-rules-of-networking.html

So there is obviously a meme in the air.

My thoughts are similar to his on this – I use Facebook (and yes, you and I are linked though you do not meet any of the following categories:-)) for people I grew up with, went to school with, got drunk with, traveled with, lived with…married, etc. On Facebook, everyone of my friends can read what I am saying about every other one of my friends – so to keep it lively, it helps to have criss-crossing relationships.

I use LinkedIn for a broader mix of people, friends, colleagues, former collagues, frenemies, future colleagues, students, passers-by. I can be super-open about connecting with folks by using LinkedIn, and I can keep my chummy funny friendly group close-knit on Facebook.

Twitter’s “follow” relationship is asymmetric. When I follow someone, they do not have to follow me back. They can, however, block me, if they want. They can also choose to follow me later, if they like. Even if they are not following me, I can direct messages their way (via the @ mechanism). However, there are benefits to the symmetric follow relationship, such as being able to direct message each other.

Twitter isn’t perfect, but by allowing relationships to be asymmetric in this way, they have allowed for a richer set of connections (including ugly ones, like spambot followers).

If person A wants to be friends w/ person B, simply hitting a button on Facebook really doesn’t do the term ‘friend’ justice. You’re going to have to work harder to be a friend. Just as if I walked down the street in my neighborhood, I wouldn’t call someone a friend simply because they live three doors down. I have to lend him some sugar, invite him over for a BBQ or otherwise make a meaningful connection. Perhaps Mr. Stanton expects the same of his online friends as he does of his real world friends. I consider Grant a friend not because I read and enjoy his books and blog (which I do), but because we have shared conversations via email and in person on numerous occasions.

Or, again as in real life, maybe people are just different. Maybe Mr. Stanton is an intensely private person and the idea of thousands of friends, Facebook or real, weirds him out. Other people feel differently. I recently reached out to Alex Bogusky of Crispin, Porter + Bogusky, a guy I’d put in the same class of talent and celebrity as Stanton, and Bogusky was super friendly and charitable. Doesn’t make him a better person than Stanton, just different.

The fact that I could read a book by Grant McCracken and cite him in my company’s publication and then a decade later be joining him for dinner at a restaurant is stunning. And very cool. We can be fans and friends, I guess?

The other day I stopped into a local design firm and was meeting folks, one of whom said, oh, yes, I’ve known your name. She then made air-quotes (or scare-quotes) and said “You’re – ‘famous’” which didn’t make me feel like a celebrity or like she was following me or a fan, but just that she knew who I was. It was totally a good feeling, of course, but a very natural one. I know a lot of people. And a lot of people know “of” me.

I’m not elevating my own network or community-celebrity to that of a McCracken or Stanton, just throwing out a few examples. Fodder for Grant’s next post on the topic?