This article called “Can You Put a Value on Virtual Relationship” ranks the worth of your online relationships thusly, in order of decreasing importance:
I would like to respectfully submit that this is utter garbage. For several reasons.
First, because nobody has ever given a hoot about Google Buzz.
Second, because Facebook interactions are more personal, and therefore much more important, than LinkedIn ones.
But third and mostly, because I take massive issue with the concept of “virtual relationships”. There are no “virtual relationships”. There are relationships – and there are stronger and weaker ones. I have a weak one with someone I see occasionally and I have a stronger one with someone I know casually and I have a much stronger one with a dear friend. But theirÂ strength or weakness has nothing to do with where I see them occasionally, or where we have our long and deep conversations. They might be through a computer or they might be at a picnic table. Who cares? The setting isn’t what determines their strength, or their “value”.
And, while I’m at it, I really dislike the idea of “valuing” relationships. Relationships aren’t houses in Monopoly. They’re people. And in my definition, people you care about. Not ones that you’re mentally tagging with a price gun.
Am I off base here? Do you think about people this way? Do you think about your online interactions this way?