I wish I had a “magic bullet” that I could share to allow us all to manage the multiple accounts that we tend to accumulate. Of late, I have noticed a tendency toward connection with one person on multiple platforms. I have Twitter followers who are Facebook, LinkedIn, and Plaxo connections as well . . . even one or two from the Intersection:).

New applications appear regularly that claim to help us manage all this, but I have yet to find one that really lives up to its hype. I hope people will not blame the applications for what is probably a transitional issue . . . someone somewhere will come up with a solution that makes it easy for us to manage our multiple online lives.

Then we’ll have something else to worry about . . . that informal Facebook comment that inadvertently went out to our entire business network:).

John

Just today, I saw a Harvard Business Publishing post by David Armano at bit.ly/39K0OV which outlined six social media trends that he thinks are upon us. The very first one indicated that people would become more judicious about their social networking and start paring down their friends lists on various sites.

While Armano’s comments had more to do with the ability to just keep up with all the quasi-connections that tend to grow on multiple sites, this trend seems to fit in with what you are discussing. If someone feels a need to cut back on the number of connections, you have just given them a guide for making the decisions about who makes the cut and who doesn’t.

A old saying goes “Surround yourself with positive people” continues to be widely quoted and I believe that is because it’s true.

Of course, this does beg the question you raised of whether we detach from all those homeless, wretched, ill, and undesirable people . . . or whether we continue to serve “the least of these”.

Great questions to grapple with, especially in these times.

John

Your post hit on something I’ve been wondering about — are we in danger of maxxing ourselves out with all the connecting we do on social networking sites? What’s sustainable? Sometimes, frankly, connecting on Twitter and Facebook feels tiring. I also seem to miss the posts and tweets from some of the people i enjoy and value most, in between those. So the number 150 seems to me to be about right.

There are some tools I haven’t tried for better managing social media and tracking specific friends and followers. I need to give those a try, but I suspect you’re right. I’ve already seen and heard about people paring down their friends and follower lists, or quitting Facebook or Twitter altogether.

http://truthmerchant.wordpress.com/2009/10/20/yet-another-christian-hypocrite/

According to Julia Wood (who I mention in the post) there are three levels of confirmation.

1.) Confirming others exist
2.) Acknowledging their thoughts or feelings
3.) Endorsement

Looking at blog stats, a blogger can see how many people actually read a post (which might equate to level 1 of confirmation.) Generally, there is at least a 10-to-1 ratio of readers to comments.

Comments might equate with level 2. Even comments that disagree can be confirming, I think, if they acknowledge the validity of the writer’s position or his/her feelings.

Level 3 would be when someone reads a post and thinks enough to say something good about it on their own blog post, and include a link back.

I wonder if this has anything to do with why so many people start blogging, but don’t stick with it. There’s the time commitment, of course. And you have to come up with ideas. And then even when you do, there are the times when no one comments.

So in light of this, thanks, Joel, for commenting.

Good thoughts here, and thanks for opening the discussion.

Thomas Madron’s paper on Communion (the PDF on his site) includes a discussion of the questions of community and physical presence. Some of the points he makes are:
- There’s still the ‘God and communicant’ aspect of Communion
- Some understandings of the ‘community’ implied in Communion include the “communion of the saints” – all believers past, present, and future, and in other locations (i.e. the one body of Christ). Many of those are not physically present.
- Depending on how a congregation celebrates Communion, there may be little person-to-person connection…Madron argues that it’s probably more of an individualistic thing than the church might admit.
- He also cites an example of a blind man who had a hard time getting anyone from his congregation to give him a ride to church, and on the occasions he could get a ride, he had to ask someone to tell him what was going on because they used a printed bulletin. The blind man was grateful for Madron’s online Communion service (not quite sure how that worked, but he was able to follow it).

Is there a question of ‘validity’ if the Communion is done in an assembly of believers or not? Or is it a degree of quality that might be missing?

A virtual Eucharist goes against the whole point of communion. We celebrate Christ who is God incarnate. This means God entered space and time, that he made himself physically present in the world.

To remove physical aspect presence (here I am referring to the assembly of believers) misses the point. To be present often means to be physically present, especially in this digital age.

“Being there” is a further testimony of the incarnation celebrated in the Eucharist.