Over at Spamnotes, Venkat Balasubramani riffed off  my post on the downside of undeserved self-esteem by providing bit of historical context, if there is such a thing as historical context when referring to an internet phenomenon that’s existed for slightly less time than a fruit fly.

What’s interesting about this is that this is a relatively recent phenomenon.  I don’t have any claim for being an early active participant on the internet, but my anecdotal observations are that in the “early days,” you could put yourself out there, but you were just as likely to be ripped to shreds as you were affirmed by the adoring masses (or by your “tribe”).

In fact, one of the big benefits touted of the internet is that it is a gigantic merit-based system where the crowd functions as an adequate screening mechanism to separate the good ideas, arguments, and positions from the bad.  You can put whatever you want out there, but chances are, someone else (somewhere) would cut it down to its appropriate size.  Somewhere along the way, between GeoCities and Facebook, all of this changed.

Way back when, like two, maybe three years ago, I referred to the blawgosphere as peer-reviewed.  Lawyers wrote their thoughts on issues of substance, and other lawyers voted, whether by clicking or commenting, on whether the substance was good, bad or otherwise. 

We took our lumps when we wrote something stupid, and nobody was shy about letting us know.  The blawgosphere was a meritocracy in its purest form, available to anyone with the desire to put his butt on the line, to rise or fall. 

In large measure, it’s dead.  In its place is the circle jerk of authentic engagement, blowing kisses to the insipid so that they will hug you in return.  It finally dawned on the unwashed that by fawning over each other, they could create a tribe to praise and support them, regardless of whether they brought anything to the table.  We are awash in complementary actions and reactions, with increasingly little to justify it.

What’s changed?  You guessed it.  With interactions increasingly becoming social (i.e., attached to our “true” and “authentic” online personas), flattery and faux kudos are on the rise.  In fact they are the norm.  People compliment each other endlessly and mindlessly.  The internet has become a giant self esteem pyramid scheme of sorts.

As new people arrive daily, they want nothing more than to be welcomed and embraced.  Cynical old timers have seized upon the fragile and needy newbies by tossing them a stray kiss and receiving their uncritical devotion in return.  In the process, It’s home, home on the range.  You know, “where seldom is heard a discouraging word.”

Venkat asks whether we’re creating a self-esteem bubble, with people roaming the internet with an inflated sense of self-worth that will ultimately burst? It seems pretty likely, as all this unwarranted love and goodwill is undermined by the reality that rises to the surface that everybody online isn’t the most wonderfulest person ever, that you don’t really want to complement your latest twitter follower for getting out of bed without falling down and that you don’t truly care what trauma is endured by a second year law student. 

At some point, thoughtful people will start yearning for something more thoughtful.

Does this make the bursting bubble a bad thing?  I think not.  Venkat’s allusion to a pyramid scheme is particularly apt.  It seems inconceivable that people will find it perpetually worthwhile to engage in this delusion of self-congratulatory drivel.  We can only applaud others for burping so many times before we’ve had our fill and demand something a little more worthwhile to generate a compliment.

At this phase of the blawgosphere’s maturity, there are many who have captured an audience via this pyramid scheme of mutual undeserved applause, but whose substance is lacking.  When the bubble bursts, they will disappear.  When it’s no longer enough to spread the love, when there isn’t enough time in the day to offer another empty gesture in the hope that it will be requited, it will fade.  Then, I hope, we can return to a time when blawgers, and readers, will scrutinize carefully for merit.  Then, when someone applauds, it will mean something rather than just be an even exchange.

In the meantime, the self-promoters and scammers will have their day.  Those who thrive on the pyramid scheme will enjoy the attention they receive in return for their faux blown kisses.  But like all pyramid schemes, it will eventually collapse onto itself.  And we can go back to the meritocracy that the blawgosphere once promised.  For now, it’s all about blowing smoke up each other’s butts.  Eventually, the smoke will clear.

My only hope is that the bubble bursts before those who are putting in the effort to provide substantive work, solid thoughtful effort, get too disgusted and move on to more worthwhile pursuits.