I've said it elsewhere, but I want y'all's take on an issue that I think is central to TRIBE.net's core value:


I've been invited to join a number of individuals' networks, but I've declined... I'm a firm believer that the FRIENDS network is a trust network, and that it won't be worth a hill of beans if there isn't a substantial relationship between the point of origin and their first degree.


I mean, what value is it to me if I want to buy/sell/share something with my network if their "friends" are nothing more than strangers who were handy at making decent first impressions? It's not much value at all! If the only difference between TRIBES and FRIENDS is a degree or two of randomness, then why have a FRIENDS channel to begin with?


Whenever I talk to folks about TRIBE.net, I talk about how revolutionary and useful it is that TRIBE.net incorporate three different ways to build one's network: a trusted channel (FRIENDS); an affinity channel (TRIBES); and an exchange channel or marketplace (LISTINGS) — each one offering a slightly different value-add to the mix.


The value of this mix is threatened, though, by the high incentive folks have to artificially expanding their FRIENDS network with complete strangers: there's no way to expand it substantially without compromising the value of the trust that should be had between the origin and its first degree.


So... I've been thinking: What if there were an ACQUAINTANCE node in the FRIENDS network? What if I could invite someone, not into my _first_ degree, but into my _second_ (and their friends into my third) and vice versa? ... Then I could still grow my FRIENDS network without diluting the meaning of a first degree — a group of folks that I know, and can recommend wholeheartedly.


I've heard other recommendations, including a grading system for first degree members and the like. But these seem to difficult to implement, too confusing to guarantee wide support, and still compromise the value of the first degree.


Comments?

--S