Then again, you could just be Jawad in hiding. You don’t seem to want to want to let us know who you are, and I know you came here from a chat room over at Shuzak.com.

Regardless, unless you’re willing to have a conversation, and not leave anonymous, additionally degrading comments, we really don’t have a lot to say to each other.

But I would be happy to chat more with a real person, no matter what you think about the issue.

Now that I will probably be bashed for saying moms spend all their time on their family and have no life, or some other such silly statement. The thing is that technophile moms are not even a significant minority in most places on the internet, a few token here and there, but the time and energy put it is just not worth it for most of them.

Nobody is discriminating against moms, or calling them dumb. My mother is way smarter then me, more disciplined, way way WAY more successful then I will probably ever be in business, and uses computers everyday in her work, but it took me 4 hours to explain the concept of aim to her and teach her to use it, because she didn’t care about instant messaging. And that is the crux of the issue.

…eDad (aka the Bloke

How does the fact that someone gave birth enter into the ability to use a website?

I am in a difficult position on this blog. eMom’s readers are obviously loyal to her and biased against me. Moreover, since they read blogs, they are likely to be well versed in technology. If you disagree with my comments, it is more likely because you are a minority in the category of people I am talking about.

Instead of focusing on who he thinks is inccapable of using the interface (which he really can’t be sure of), he should focus on who he wants to use the interface. For example he could say, “I’m focusing on the young male college engineering student demographic for this social network” and he wouldn’t get into nearly as much trouble as if he said, “We aren’t building our user interface for old, uneducated, female, stay-at-home moms.”

Did that make sense?

It’s socially acceptable to focus on a market demographic.

It isn’t socially acceptable to exclude a demographic.

Very different animals.

Now you’re going after and degrading older people as well. WOW! Why can’t you just say that most people are not technically inclined enough to use social networks. I would totally agree with that.

I setup and oversee Intranet networks by profession and I can tell you that most people in general, know very little about computers and how they work. It never ceases to amaze me how a person can use a computer every day and learn nothing in the process.

Considering that young adults have had the advantage of the computer age growing up you would think that they would know a lot more about computers than they do. I can tell you that they are just as ignorant about computers as any other age group. The truth is most people don’t have enough of an interest and are basically too lazy to learn.

What I’m having a hard time comprehending is why you think the way that you do. Everyone has their shortcomings. This is not limited to one person or a group of people for that matter. No good can ever come from profiling a group people.

By the way, I’m 51 years old and I have many people more than half my age asking me computer related questions. I would have to think that I fall in that group of older people that you mentioned since you said not really old in your post.

Oh. It doesn’t sound like he ever was…

I have no problem with you pointing out that any social network doesn’t have a user-friendly interface.

I DO have a problem with you singling out moms as a section of the population that needs to be talked down to, or that would find any site “too complex”. Some moms will. Some won’t.

Your comment on Mashable was completely out of line.

LOVE your idea on the post title – but I got it too late. I’ll keep that in mind for future reference!

Techscape – THANKS for the mention!

Now this is not to say that no “mom” can use a social network. It simply means that a social network that is complex in functionality is unnecessarily reducing its market share. When developing a social network for somewhat older crowd (I know, not too old), it is better to make things as simple as possible. The social network mentioned on Mashable was difficult for me to comprehend in the 10 minutes I spent on it. That is quite a lot of time in a world where the attention span of the average user is that of an orangutan.

Women can, of course, be as versed in technology as men are (if not more). Though, the problem is that there aren’t that many women in technology just as there aren’t that many men in nutrition. Keeping things simple is an easy solution that works for everyone.

I’m a male. Ok, go ahead and shoot me now and get it over with.

Seriously, the two mentioned guru’s did speak out of terms. These guys seem to forget that they once were small fish in a big pond and tend to forget the people that got them there.

I will say however, that Aaron Wall is a genius when it come to SEO. I personally have gained a lot of knowledge from him. With that said, he still shouldn’t have mouthed off the way that he did and probably has pissed off a large group of potential future customers. Not a good business move.

If I can make a suggestion. You might want to add their names to your tag line. It will help drive more people to this post.

Just because you don’t like them doesn’t mean that you can’t ride on their traffic wave.

Regardless, the language you used in the post in question is not congruent with your stated intentions.

I totally believe everything you just wrote in your comment here – but no matter what, I do believe that in your post, you have aligned ‘mom bloggers’ with ‘naive amateurs’.

Perhaps there is a way to reword your article to be clearer on your true meaning?

The point of my post is that many people with significant authority in search and communities are making crumbs relative to their real value…especially those that are new to the web. I once was naive enough to use AOL. And I was quite broke at one point.

That line of thinking is based on my own experience, current income, and past income. I don’t think that income is a true proxy for the value of a person, but the point is that there are going to be many people looking to close the value gaps in a non automated fashion outside of search and Web 2.0 algorithms.

As far as women and social networks go, some brain studies have concluded that women brains have a larger Corpus Callosum and are better with language and communication.

I also fund a profitable business ran by a partner who has a full time woman writer on staff. She gets paid far more than what I was making a few years ago, and she is a far better writer than I am.

I didn’t forget my people skills when I was writing. I generally don’t write to appease people who want to pull me out of context and run with it. I write for the people who read my blog over and over again. Of course that does make it easy to get pissed off at some of my articles that are syndicated on other sites. Sorry on that, but thanks for the mention.