The social component is thought by many to be the true spirit of what we obsessively hear called as the Web 2.0. Not the round font logos, nor pink or blue gradients.

The need for more human interaction and developing an online identity has lead to the apparition of thousands of social networks and social media platforms out of which only a few managed to get the blessing of the masses. What set them apart from the rest? What made them turn from social experiments to successful businesses? The user, their biggest asset.

Power to the people

During development stages and also while growing in popularity, these social media platforms understood the need to focus on what users wanted or needed:

• The means to connect with people who they shared interests with;
• The means to discover content based on their own interests;
• The means to become an important part of a community.

Driven by such needs, some members of these social networks turned into what we call power users. They were the most prolific users of each platform, gathering masses of other users around them, sharing the most content and most times acting like evangelists for the services they used.

The idea of one day becoming one themselves, of wielding the power that such users have, attracted more and more people to these social networks, giving them the boost required to reach mainstream and go beyond, turning them into the multi-million dollar businesses we know them to be today: Facebook, StumbleUpon, Digg, Twitter.

Social Media is shifting perspectives

The mirage of power users also had the unlucky, but somehow normal, outcome of attracting people who’d want to bend the rules and exploit the system in order to obtain personal benefits. So, unlike our wall-climbing-building-jumping superhero Spiderman, they did not get the fact that “with great power comes great responsibility”. Also, to an extent, the social media platforms themselves, turned into online business superheroes, neglected the concept completely and focused their actions against power users instead of thriving to come up with solutions to prevent such exploits. They chose the path of reaction instead of action and so, a witchhunt began.

The people that were once their most respected assets and their closest allies were forbidden to do any kind of self promotion, no matter the percentage of it compared to the contribution they made to growing the platform, nor the fact that most times, this so called self promotion was nothing more than addition of new content, quality content even. When money is involved and these platforms offer advertising methods to “self promote”, you have to be at least the next online Messiah, sharing fish and bread to the people expecting nothing in return.

Power from the people

Such is the case of StumbleUpon and more recently Digg. The idea of being a StumbleUpon power user was at some point similar to being some sort of modern Robin Hood. You’d have to keep quiet, do your thing and hope you won’t get noticed by the local SU sheriff. Shortly, Digg followed in their footsteps hunting such high profile users to the extent of banning them from ever using the service again. How dare they get any kind of profit from using the platform and not share it in part with the owners?

On the other hand, we have the platforms that have always encouraged you to be as active as you can, with limited restrictions (mostly common sense restrictions) and let the rest of the users decide if you’re worth following and thus becoming a power user or not. A notable example would definitely be Twitter .

Have you ever seen a Twitter user being banned because they dared share a link to their own website or blog, unless it’s a shady business or pornographic content? I haven’t. Indeed, Twitter is yet to discover its own successful money making recipe which might turn things around at a later stage.

And what about Digg’s new approach? The power users are still there, only they are not real people. They have been replaced with large media corporations and publishing groups that pump steroids into their content with the help of Digg users. Why aren’t they hunted down? The answer is truly simple: money. They bring in the cash for the platform, but their success depends on the mass-appeal of the platform. This way, the old creed of “power to the people” shifted to “power from the people”.  But how long will this last?

People started noticing that StumbleUpon is nothing but a way to pump up your Alexa rank. While a few years back this would have meant the world for a website’s advertising efforts, now that most advertisers seek results and real conversions, that you have more chances to get through cost-per-click or cost-per-lead than with the old cost-per-mile model, StumbleUpon’s model is outdated and thus has severely decreased in popularity a lot.

For Digg it’s just the beginning. When people will start realizing that their content will virtually have no chance to outrun the competing corporate content, they’ll abandon ship and Digg will be forced to either reconsider its position or take the fall.

These are the past and the present of social media, and unless the user is the center of attention of both, there will be no future.

Free PDF eBook: Corporate Blogging Guide by Blogsessive

Does this sound familiar?

Your StumbleUpon account has been frozen.

If not, don’t worry, you might get that email soon, because StumbleUpon is on a witch hunt.

I’ve received a lot of emails from friends and messages on Twitter from people that have been recently banned by StumbleUpon.

I too got my account frozen 3 weeks ago, and initially I did not want to make a big deal out of it. But, since it already involves too many people, and 3 weeks have passed since I’ve sent my email to Walter, StumbleUpon’s community manager and got no response yet, I decided to write this post and share my views.

Dear StumbleUpon

What you’re doing is not wrong. It’s more than wrong. It’s a stab in the backs of those that made you who you are today. Yes, I’m sure you’re going to quote the ToS again, and say that “common users” made SU what it has become, but I’ll disagree.

It was the bloggers, the internet marketers, those spreading the word about StumbleUpon and it’s benefits. And yet, you still think of them as spammers.

Even now, I did not understand why my own account was frozen, but I managed to come up with 2 theories.

1. Either the fact that my profile page contained links to Blogsessive and my other site, CreativEurope, and you considered it “promotion”.

2. Or perhaps the fact that I’ve sent and received votes to and from my network.

Either way, your way of dealing with this is wrong. If you don’t want links in profiles, turn of the HTML tags. If you don’t like people voting on friends’ stories, make that clear and then, step out of the “social websites” pack.

And to be true, even if it would have been against the ToS, I still would have voted on my friends’ submissions. That’s why they are MY FRIENDS. Because I enjoy their content. That’s why it’s called social networking. Because we make friends through it.

Spammers still rule the realm of StumbleUpon, while people using it with moderation are being hunt down, and banned. What’s even more annoying is that you don’t care enough to at least give them a personal answer.

If you’re interested in learning about advertising

on StumbleUpon, please visit this page for more

information: [link removed]

Is that why you ban people? Is StumbleUpon in such a financial mess that you start banning only to “encourage” people to pay for your “traffic”?

Ever since this witch hunt has begun, somewhere around April this year, StumbleUpon’s traffic has lowered continuously, according to both Alexa and Compete. I wonder why?

Keep that up and you’ll lose all those who promoted your website, or still do it out of their own belief. I’m not saying that you might need to put an end to it, but you might have to watch yourselves downgraded to a B-list website.

For the sake of the good times I had as a StumbleUpon user, please reconsider your attitude, or at least take time to investigate deeper. Make sure the people you’re banning are real spammers.

PS: Walter, you’ve got a 3 week old email.

The story of Ian Lurie is very similar.

Free PDF eBook: Corporate Blogging Guide by Blogsessive

Every blogger concerned about his blog’s exposure and traffic levels has a StumbleUpon account, right? Oh, you don’t? Then you should. But never mind that, let me tell you about some less happier experiences on StumbleUpon.

I’m one of those StumbleUpon users that usually discovers and votes on pages when he has time, when he finds something really interesting, or to help out his SU friends. But sometimes, being friendly and willing to help is not enough, sometimes, somebody has to take it over the top. Here are 5 guaranteed ways to piss me off on StumbleUpon.

Method One

You visit my profile, do a bit of research and message me, telling me how much you love my stumbles and my blog, and how much you’d love to be SU buddies. Flattering right? After reading the message I’m checking if that person has added me as a friend and I find that he didn’t.

So why would you expect me to add you first when you’re the one approaching me? Add me, and If I’m convinced I might add you back. That’s how it goes.

Method Two

Starts exactly like method one, messages and flattering included. Only that this time, the user added you as a friend. That’s pretty nice, let’s add him/her back, which you do. Two days later – surprise! – you’ve been removed by that user from the friends list. This basically means you’re his fan now, while he/her is some kind of a SU god. Dirty move right? You know what to do next.

Method Three

We’re friends, and as friends do, I like to help out. You ask me once to discover a story, ask me if I can review a page, all good. But with time, you see that I’ve voted on most of your stories, so you start sending 6-7 review requests per day, 2 or 3 out of the same website, and probably you’ll throw in a discovery too. OK, when was the last time I’ve asked you to help me out? 2 weeks ago! Let’s keep things fair play.

Method Four

We’re friends and you send me stories to stumble and review. I’m OK with that, and sincerely, most times I take the time to check the page out and post a SU review too. I know it helps a lot.

When my time comes to ask for you help, you hurry to hit that thumb up button. Good, I can understand that once, twice, but every time? A review for a thumb sometimes does not seam like a good deal.

Method Five

We’re friends and the friendly SU activity goes just great, but there’s something that you do that I really hate. I understand that we’re best friends and all that, but do you really have to send me “hug” and “thank you” pictures and messages every 30 minutes? Once is nice. Twice is flattering. More is spam.

And to understand why this attitude is so frustrating check this: StumbleUpon sends email notifications when you receive private messages, which is great. The problem is that the only link contained in that email is a link to their sponsorship page (smart isn’t it?). From there to my inbox I have to click 2 more times only to find a message saying the same thing as the one before and the one before that. And that’s frustrating.

Respect Your Friends

So, dear friends and StumbleUpon users, be careful how you treat your friends because that “Remove from friends” button is pretty accessible. Give without asking anything in return and you’re guaranteed to receive more than you would have expected.

Free PDF eBook: Corporate Blogging Guide by Blogsessive