Response from: Simon Wakeman    (07/04/07 1:15pm)

Hi Linda,

Thanks for the link and reading my post.

I see what you're saying about the number of offline networks that one person can participate in - that's a fair point.

But I'm still convinced that niche online networks don't have a sustainable future. By their nature, networks draw users in and demand their time in return for the rewards they get.

I can see a scenario where the big networks absorb the smaller ones, but the niche networks continue to exist within the larger ones - like groups do now on Facebook.

With this scenario people could keep different offline networks in one online place, but quite separately.

It'll be interesting to see how it all shakes out

cheers,
sw

Response from: Maurene Caplan Grey    (07/05/07 6:25am)

Simon, I agree with your sentiments that the shake out will result in major social networks, with interest-specific groups (much like Facebook and even LinkedIn). Moreso, convergence is already underway with the big vendors gobbling up the smaller venders in order to extend their own networks (witness Yahoo's acquisition of Flickr; Google's YouTube; News Corp's MySpace; CBS's Last.fm; eBay's StumbleUpon .... ) -- the ultimate shake-out. However, there will always be single-minded, niche social communities. For example, I'm in the midst of developing a social community for our local township -- the purpose of which is to build citizen interest for a human-based civic advocacy community.

Response from: Lin    (07/05/07 7:26am)

I believe in the niche social networking sites. People want to "belong" and they don't want the whole world knowing what they're thinking. They only want their group to know. That's why I believe in niche networks, especially for personal things like parenting, illnesses and such.