---

Ok, here's a thing about me: as vain as I'm NOT; I'm very picky when it comes to who to choose and let-in in my little social-zone - inevitably making it a tough chore for me acquainting any Jerks and Jills. In a nutshell, I don't mix easily as am a tad of a fussy with loads of self-proven socialising theories, rules and principles, which have seen me reject tons of unwanted associates in my circle of friends. Call me a snob if you can, but I know I don't come close to that label. To my defense though, I've always been a fan of keeping a limited number of friends as it brings less intricacies. And moreover, I view friendship as more than just sharing greetings and making trivial conversations - it holds much deeper meanings than that. In my world, a Quaker should know there are certain arduous obligations and responsibilities, which are expected to be fulfilled. However, with cyber social networking spaces fast emerging and taking over traditional social conventions, should my fraternity rules and principles still apply? Has the word "friendship" lost its ancient meaning? Or has a contemporary technology definition outcroped? Regardless, as long as I see the word "friend"; they too shall apply (says the man with over 560 facebook 'friends'). Yes, I do admit that me: 'the high and mighty father' of socialising principles, did once succumb to the conspicuous lures of cyberspace, and I'm guilty of 'accepting' all facebook friendship requests coming my way (except those faceless ones) without thinking twice -- sue me for being weak and human! Anyroad, after having an AHA moment, I revisited my social theories; relating them to newly emanated friendship-making tool, facebook.You don't need to know why facebook became my targeted brunt. But if you must know: besides the fact that it is one of the largest used cyberspace sites, facebook is also the only social network that uses the sentimental word "friends"; while twitter uses "followers". On the other globe of cyberspace, mxit and BlackBerry use the word "contacts", which do not hold solace meanings like "friend". So, if those 560 individuals in my facebook account are "friends", are they living to the steep responsibilities of a Quaker? Do they console me when down? Do they honestly know who I am, what I like, what I dislike, my values and principles? What about my dreams? No! They don't live up to the obligations and notions of friendships and certainly know nothing about me! Well, not everyone. At least 20 percent I can proudly put a friend stamp on their foreheads. In that 20 percent, some I personally know from the 'real world' and some took time and tried to know me better after accepting their 'friendRequest'. The remaining 80 percent is just a bunch of redundants whom I last saw the day I pressed 'confirm'; and some continuously update their statuses, but we never exchange a "hi" nor comment, write on each others walls or inbox. Like I said earlier, I limit my friends. So,the next step is to shamelessly slay all the mutants from my account, because we apparently don't share homogeneous friendship values. And for anyone requesting my friendship, I will vigilantly interview them as there is no sense in adding more inactive odds. As long as facebook still has the tab "friends", this is how am keeping things. Eat that, adders! Anyway, what's the point of having thousands of friends if you're not reaping the benefits? Is there friendship authenticity in a globe (social networking sites) where making a 'friend' is as easy as a click? Drop me your thoughts..

---

---

---

Comments