Web 2.0 is not only over hyped, but innovators add features to web applications to improve the user experience. Are these extra bells and whistles really improving our lives and making things easier?

To me, the answer to this question is a resounding no.

I don’t fault people for wanting to be diverse. I don’t fault innovators for wanting to innovate. However, I think that a narrower focus is better for survival in the long run.

Interestingly enough, I had this conversation with a close friend who inspired me to blog about a year ago. Blogging on broad topics, he said, was not ideal. Focus on one area; don’t go in different directions. Capture your audience first.

Initially, I didn’t think his advice was that sound. I think blogs can go all directions. After all, Darren Rowse said that your first 10,000 blog posts are always the worst. He’s right about that. But your first 10 blog posts are probably worse than your latter 90, and you improve as you go along. Brian Clark summed it up nicely by urging bloggers to write. You gain experience with every post, every comment, and every ounce of feedback.

As many of you may or may not know, I’m speaking at SMX Social Media, which will be my first speaking engagement ever. Tickets are almost sold out for Tuesday and Wednesday’s conference (but if for whatever reason, you’ve delayed this long, you might as well sign up now and use the code SMX10offSM to get 10% off).

Still, if you can’t make the conference but are free tomorrow night, the Internet Marketers of New York are holding a charity bash from 7PM-10PM. The cost is $40, all of which will be donated to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Everything else is sponsored by the great guys at Best of the Web. One of my friends in the social media sphere is Marty Weintraub, who was diagnosed with Lymphoma, so this hits home. Marty and I will be there tomorrow night… will you?

Be there (and say hello)! Town Tavern Bar & Grill, 134 West 3rd Street (at 6th Avenue), October 15th 7PM-10PM

One of the more important aspects of social media is the emphasis on user generated content that blends with community discourse. As people have noted, many comments are negative. Some of the comments are downright scathing. As such, many users in social networks tread carefully, and I really cannot blame them. Whereas some of us are so much less anonymous than many commenters, we’re bound to feel vulnerable since nearly all of our cards are on the table.

There’s also the element of being able to vote comments up (for agreement) or down (for disagreement). Many community-based sites operate in this way (and for the sites that don’t, I am often compelled to search for a + sign or a thumbs up sign so that I can vote my approval). A few weeks ago, a user contributed to a respected blog with a comment that said that giving a thumbs down is negative and reflects a natural homogeneity within the specific community. The comment in question was critical of a blog post but clearly lacked sufficient information in its criticism, if only to say that the commenter did not enjoy the post by the poster. This is fine, and in general, criticism is quite valuable, but criticism needs to be backed up.