Blog 12

It seems to me, Boyd and Ellison have a pretty good understanding of SNS, but I am going to place that understanding into an analogy that I feel fits well. They pose 3 major "fabrics" required for SNS such as: 1) public or semi public fabric 2) user connection fabric 3) resources and connections fabric. I use this word, fabric, because without every piece you just have pieces, not the whole. Within the fabric, Boyd and Ellison break down some of the "threads" (bear with me). Under the public system there is a focus for users to have what they call "impression management and friendship performance", which is basically Facebook wrapped up all nice and pretty. Within their definition they use the theory that requires a broad sense of the word "structure", that their needs to be a purpose of bridging online and offline together, a broad idea of privacy, and then finally mentions that each network is a themed network (generally speaking). Well Beer comes in and says no this is too broad, and there is too much room for confusion when there only needs to be precision. Narrow down everything, and to his terms he brings out the fact that their fabric has flaws in it...big flaws....like gaping holes. I agree with Beer in saying that there should be and really is a difference between Social Network Sites and Social NetworkING sites. One has the purpose of networking and friendship and another does not, like in his example "youtube" is not for the sole purpose of friendship, whereas friendster, facebook, and such places perhaps are. He focuses MAINLY that the entire blanket being built with these fabrics should be themed and focused more narrowly in order to discuss.

I believe that SNS and communities coexist closely, but like Beer so states, SNS is for friends. Baym shows largely in that communities are for the support and the resources that sometimes can create into relationships such as friends, whereas SNS is built for interpersonal relationships.