The system of accountability (honor system) and the focus on action in The Strenuous Life is the ideal model for future social networks. The Strenuous Life is a more social network primarily in the way it fosters interaction in the real world through earning badges, completing agons and working with members rather than interaction with the real world via platform-based social interaction. The SL platform is intended, intentionally or otherwise, to discourage lingering on the platform itself. In essence, SL online is a big message board, and currently rather clunky in organization and funcationality, but that doesn't take away from its straightforward utility in supporting members and keeping track of activities. It does just enough of what it needs to do to get members away from the platform rather than continually drawing them to it, without sacrificing the overall purpose of the network - connecting with members and encouraging real world interaction. There is no built-in endless scrolling and the primary format of communication is written word. A "liking" feature exists that is, on the surface, no different than that found on any other social network, but it doesn't necessarily overshadow any other calls to action.

Further, the platform allows for the freedom of individual participants to make their own choices, share their results, accept failure, responsibility and criticism in a self-reinforcing structure. Even if it runs on the honor system that only means that there is more pressure on the individual to perform because he can only fail himself, not being strictly tied to his Class. On SL one values all the time he spends on it - whether engaging on message boards, earning badges, or meeting up. Everything revolves around the core message of SL.

Finally, SL has the added advantage of being a system that one has to pay into, even if it's a one-time use-for-life fee. I suspect that if a social network requires users to pay, those users will at least be more conscious of how they spend their time on it. They would be more compelled to get more value out of their buck - perhaps this means less wasted time with antagonization, trolling, etc. and time spent more efficiently in communication and sharing - especially if the network charged per hour of use. One can only wonder how social media behavior might change (and what behaviors will not) if the networks, or perhaps certain features, were behind a paywall. Imagine if social networks charged a penny per "like". Would people be as quick to like something, or would they begin to second guess their choice? Would they give their likes, or more importantly their written comments, more thought? What if it were one dollar per like? Would we begin to see more accurate, less over-exaggerated, metrics and more authentic social media behavior? The revenue from membership or pay-to-play features could conceivably also eliminate or at least reduce the need for advertising, which simultaneously would address in some measure extant privacy issues involving user data and advertisers.

I recommend that a future action network (the evolution of existing social networks) needs the following additions to build on the success of today's networks while mitigating their shortcomings:

Charge users to join: Clearly a lot of people won't like this and would rather opt for existing free options, even knowing there are inherent negative trade-offs (ads, privacy, lower quality, etc.), but there are people out there who are also willing to pay, and there are plenty of pay structures or scales that can be researched or tested (subscription-based tiers, one expensive lifetime fee, pay-to-play features, etc.)

Place limits on certain features like calls-to-action: Maybe a social network could do without a like/dislike/love button and a views count and a share feature and a re-post button, etc. This would be particular to each platform, but the point is to actually minimize engagement with the platform itself (what you might call indirect user engagement) in favor of more direct person-to-person communication. Build in measures to encourage direct communication with people's content - maybe requiring text or video replies only, and a minimum number of words in order to reply in text. Charging to use certain calls-to-action may also be a more viable alternative to just eliminating them.

While limiting platform-binging features, add features that encourage real world social interaction and activity in lieu of platform interaction and activity: Eliminate digital games on the platform itself, less calls-to-platform-action and more calls-to-real-world-action. Take a page from The Strenuous Life's book and add challenges, maybe even a reward system, skill-building courses that require participation with real members in your local area, etc. There are plenty of possibliities.

If the paywall begins to pay, remove ads: When MySpace or Facebook first arrived they were clean, to the point, straightforward, and an actual joy to use, with little to no extraneous features to distract on the platform itself. Granted, they were early in design, but at least when I interacted with other users it was actually talking to them using words, no emoji, no concern for reacting with other buttons. The addition of ads and the calls to action that also contribute to ad analytics took away that clean, focused experience. Sure, today's networks still clearly function just fine with ads, but imagine what they might be like without any? How much more enjoyable would using the platforms become? When users pay for services today, they expect to see significantly less ads (the complete elimination of ads not always being possible) compared to free services, and the quality and features of the service to be at least level with what they are paying. Knowing the connection between ads, analytics, and user behavior has been lightened would be another welcome bonus.