It's not just a matter of what's best. you make more of the tools you use, they become more valuable to you because you use them - you become integrated in their networks, content and connections. That is Metcalfe's law in action.It's also a function of which ones work together well. Who plays nice. FB, LI, TW & G+ really don't compliment each other. They each aim to grab your attention.For me I like Twitter due to its brevity. I wish I liked G+ more and more people used it than FB. I'm oh so ready to drop FB.Beyond Networks you need to think about building a tools stack. eg Tools like Triberr, but you only need one of these. More than one gets to compete.And then not to forget content networks. What is your medium of choice? Videos, slides, Images, lists, audio etc?We can't all manage all these things so we have to pick our faves and pick a combination that works for us and our content creation and networking skills and preferences.All your tools should multiply the efforts you put into them. I'm not sure people have strategies for this. They are simply accumulating tools they like - soon they will need to shed some tools/networks. We can't be everywhere. Attention and motivation are finite.

Really interesting & great timing.I have been pondering which social media channels are the "best" -- And while contemplating this, had a (sort of) epiphany this morning.First I hopped on Facebook just in time to catch Guy Kawasaki's live chat. I learned a ton...and immediately shared s.t. I learned with others on FB...While there, realized that one of my favorite ppl on Google+ (+Peg Fitzpatrick) actually works for/with Guy Kawasaki -- I had no idea. Hopped on to Google+ to reconnect with Pat and realized that, yes, this is the place for intelligent conversations and thoughtful responses...But...seconds later, there I was on Twitter, enjoying the immediacy of having 3 more ppl I had never heard of before @replying to me about my latest blog post, and relishing in the fact that, yes, as @ToyotaBC realized, a recent tweet of mine *was* a great pitch...and so, within seconds, again, I ended up pitching an idea to Top Gear US. Why not?Haven't touched the other platforms this morning, but your idea is a good one. At the same time, isn't this imperfection (lack of the ideal social network) part of what humanizes the experience?I remember at the W.R.I.T.E. 1994 conference in Vancouver one overarching theme I was aware of was dystopia/utopia as the future of the Interwebs -- We actually witnessed the birth of the WWW at that conference, in the form of a flickering, ultimately crashing, Mosaic...how far we have come.So, yes, the ideal social network...great idea...and also, well, I guess I'm always one to kind of relish our imperfect perfection.Thanks!

What a great thought Wendy! You are right - there will probably never be a Social Network that fits all.

This is a really interesting idea, Frithjof. It's funny, because I spent a good part of this year asking myself a similar question. Mine came from a place of being disheartened by the current state of social media and the way people use it.I believe that the true value of social media comes from the relationships formed there. You and I, for example, would have never been introduced had it not been for social media and some key mutual connections. What makes social media powerful is the ability to connect with others who you otherwise would have never met. Often, it stops there. Brands are losing sight of the actual relationships and focusing on the fact that they have one more connection. One more follower. One more visitor to their site.Businesses would do well to act more human online. With that in mind, my ideal network would be more about collaboration and less about broadcasting a message or advertising. But I also think the idea of an "ideal" social network is largely dependent on the way users interact with it. The users get more out of the software if they put more effort into proactively connecting with others.I personally think a good model for a social network would be one that takes it's cues from dating sites. Asking the users to fill out detailed profiles and connecting them to businesses and individuals based on their wants, needs, and interests. The individuals would be served by the businesses based on their needs, and the businesses would be able to help people without resorting to traditional advertising or sales techniques.From a core idea like that, there is a lot of opportunity to layer on some of the same tactics and technology you talk about. I think all of those things are spot on. If you were to take those things and mix them up, I'm sure you'd have something great on your hands.Thanks for taking the time to write such a thought-provoking article!

Wow, thanks for those insights Anton! I too have a problem with our focus in Social Media. I actually cringe when people refer to me as a Social Media marketer. Not because I'm not one but because of all the bad apples out there. I think Ted Rubin's book "Return on Relationships" should be required reading for anybody in the business.I am very happy we met and I am very much looking forward to talking to you about your approach to this.

This was a great read. I disagree on the categorization of Pinterest with Instagram. Pinterest is more. If an image is pinned rather than uploaded from a website, the source link exists as long as the site does. It's a commonly overlooked source of driving customers to your website.

Hi Denise! Thanks for adding an ingredient! You are right. I generalized Pinterest and didn't point out this important aspect. I agree the interlinking is a big advantage of tools like Pinterest, Slideshare, Listly.... likely another factor to be considered in the ideal social network.