And yes, you have to be selective of who you follow to some degree. If you follow and engage with a bunch of McDonald’s and Coors Light content and authors you might be signaling your desire for more of that ilk. That’s even more important with G+ since those people can influence your search results.

One hopes that Google would look at where you spent more of your time or had deeper engagement but … we’re likely a bit far off from that level of analysis. It’s an interesting area of thought and research which I believe must be solved to bring search to that next level.

I’ve always hoped G+ was reading what I named my circles (e.g. “circled me first”). That’s because I want people I circle first influencing my search results – not the other way around. But I also don’t want to be such a snob and not follow people back when they had been nice enough to converse with me and follow me. Isn’t being friendly and social often a trade-off or perhaps sub-optimal?

To use your analogy, I’ve eaten at McDonald’s and had a Coors in the name of socializing and not acting like a snob. But I also don’t want anyone assuming that’s what I’d usually prefer to do.

I like your mention of the ‘echo chamber’. I think most of those complaining are in that echo chamber, they’re in that bubble. Living and working in the Bay Area I know I’m in the bubble. I’m on guard and always reminding myself of that fact.

There’s nothing wrong with the way others use search or the Internet. It’s just different.