<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/281800</link>
		<description>Comments by grabbingsand</description>
<item>
<title>CECILY.info : On whuffie, social capital, and social climbing</title>
<link>http://cecily.info/2008/08/10/508/#IDComment12515920</link>
<description>It&amp;#039;s surprising that so few others make this very salient point.    Originally, I thought my distaste for the whuffie concept was rooted in a kind of overall BoingBoing-fatigue, back when Doctorow was publishing a new novel every other week and every hip and cool thing was being &amp;quot;discovered&amp;quot; by Xeni and company -- almost always two or three weeks too late.    But now, as the whuffie concept has floated out and away from its originator, I&amp;#039;m watching the word split in meaning.  On the one hand, it can be a way of expressing concern or offering encouragement in an Internet-acceptable way.  A scan of Metachat (Metafilter&amp;#039;s sidecar social blog) will give you several such examples.  But on the other hand, you&amp;#039;re absolutely right.  For many, this mutual encouragement is becoming less altruistic and more assumptively and promotionally symbiotic.  In those cases, the word &amp;quot;whuffie&amp;quot; is substituted for what the world has always known as an &amp;quot;old boy&amp;#039;s network.&amp;quot;  So what is the solution?  How do you spread the gospel that building a community for the sake of bettering a community is worthwhile? </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://cecily.info/2008/08/10/508/#IDComment12515920</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>