Shared publicly  - 
I must be doing something wrong on Google+. It isn't "worse than a ghost town" for me. It's active and pleasant, albeit lacking some of the initial rush.
Somphol Boonjing's profile photoJohn D. Sutter's profile photoNicholas Rumas's profile photoDean McNeill's profile photo
...Think someone got lost and wandered into Myspace by mistake?
+Geof F. - ..It's all in who you know, isn't it? I only latched onto one narcissist "add whore" since I got here, and dropped her soon enough..
It really is pathetic. These folks have never actually used G+, but complain that it's boring. Right. Everybody who actually uses it actively loves it. Perhaps they should try to get involved first, then complain.
The most fun ones, are the ones who come over here to complain about how boring and quiet is over here on g+.
He's following 28 people, 28 boring people, what does he expect?
I say within a year this man will be eating his own words and apologizing. ON G+!!
+Harry McCracken I think the article exhibits a bit of "SMBS" - Social Media Burnout Syndrome. There is a tendency that once one gets on the social media band-wagon the quality of the exchanges, the people one could connect with take a back seat to the numbers. I think that it is fallacious expectation on the one hand, after all how many people we interacted with above a cursory hello passing in the hallway type-of-thing before the Social Media Explosion? If one accepts the premise that Social Media is meant to make the initial introduction easier for those of us who are socially awkward or do not have the opportunity to spend our waking hours making connections and/or finding new friends, Google+ is at least as of now, major positive in this genre.I am no expert in this, being a late comer to the Social Media mostly for business reasons, I find their requirement of no anonymity refreshing. Looking up peoples' Intro and About sections helps me get past the first few awkward moments and if I find something that clicks, I tend to reach out to them. This is not something I find readily in FB which by design seems to stress prior acquaintanceship and the truly limiting (again by design) factors in Tweeter.
I open up Google+ multiple times a day. I have many tech editors in my Following list and a lot of my friends. I think Google+ isn't dead, it's just starting.
Exactly +Marco Meerman Don't forget by the way that every Google service was launched as a beta product. Google then got feedback from users and worked on improving the product - or, better said, finishing it.
I am sorry to sound rude or harsh but am fairly stupefied that assholes like Reimold should be preening themselves as some kind of 'techie' pundit & writing hatchet pieces like this which is based on little else other than pure vapourware. I perfectly understand that people can have different points of view & different opinions on any product or service but to base them on little else other than horse manure is a feat by itself.

In fact I wonder whether this is another example of a hack influenced in various ways to slash, maim & burn. Didn't Facebook get caught awhile back pretty much using similar techniques ( and possibly similar 'paid ' hacks ) to get at Google ? 
I agree, G+ is certainly not dead, not for me anyway. I have it open all day at work but run out of time to read it all. Yes some of it can get a little spammy but "mute this post" is great for that. And as Michael said, people who say G+ is boring are people who don't have any interests other than stalk people (go back to Facebook!) or people who have never tried it. I prefer G+ over twitter and facebook combined because I enjoy the discussions on subjects that interest me and because although I used to like twitter before G+, it's too much a links fest and I get bored of having to click through just to find out that actually it's really boring. Tell me about the subject you are posting about and if it interests me I'll click.
Although I'm not a journalist I have always believed that it is bad news that sells papers. In this context saying that Google+ is going down has achieved its purpose in that it has got people reading and commenting and thus the author of the piece earns their crust.
My take is that Google+ will become what we the positive users make of it.
For me the best thing about G+ is that it is not filled with "I am at tea", "I am now drinking tea", "I have finished drinking tea" kind of statuses. G+ for me trumps over twitter as there is no limitation to the content size and over FB as I have the right to only listen to whom I want too.
I'm getting the most value out of Google+ from conversations about technology and photography, but it's not really a place to scan for breaking news or get info about my family. If people are expecting a full spectrum of users to be here a couple of months after launch, they will be disappointed. It is a valid question as to whether Google+ will evolve beyond the early-adopter stage, but to complain it doesn't have the breadth of Twitter this early is somewhat unrealistic.
Anybody remember Facebook around 2006 or so. It was generally dead as a dodo. I still recall a friend reverting to me about a post I had put up on his wall about a year later. When I acted mighty surprised at this time lapse, he sheepishly confessed that he hadn't visited his FB account for a year.
It's the inevitable backlash - it hasn't replaced Facebook within the first five days of its existence, therefore it's failed (according to the so-called pundits).
Serendipity. I was just reading this article [via TechMeme] before opening up G+ for the morning. Lo and behold, Harry's post here is one of the top few in my stream. I'm sorry, but if +Dan Reimold is unable to find interesting content on G+, then as the old saying goes -- you're doing it wrong.
Honestly Harry, I would be all over this but none of my friends use it regularly. I basically use it now as a souped up twitter feed to comment of the musings of the internetrati. I still use G+ way more than FB or Twtr, but the people I personally care about just aren't listening.

Google needs some sustained ads on TV to get attention.
It's a question of expectations. The people who are active on G+ are ones that like to engage in conversations, particularly with people they don't know. They want to talk about emerging trends, technology or business with like-minded people. But for the majority of the population, they don't necessarily want to engage with people they don't know, they want to engage with people they do know. And in that aspect, for now, G+ isn't where it needs to be.

I see a lot of promise in G+, and when more of my friends and colleagues begin to actively use it, I will be more prominent on it, but for now, it's even less valuable for me then Twitter because there isn't enough of a critical mass in the areas that interest me.
+Dan Reimold is following 28 people on Google+ and wonders why it's a ghost town? It's ridiculously active with tons of entertaining, educational, and valuable content for me. But I follow a thousand people, most of which have alot to say. For Reimold to suggest that G+ is a a ghost town is like inviting only your 2 best buddies to a party then complaining that you couldn't get laid!
Hi all- Appreciate your comments, kindness here. I mean that-- this is an interesting thread. As you can imagine, some have been more, ahem, adolescent. To confirm, yup, I have 28 followers and no public posts NOW. That was not always the case-- followed quite a bit more people and wrote fairly regularly at the peak of my exploring July through early August. I did not find either the following or the engaging worth it. (I do respect that people based judgments on my overall activity on a 5-second glimpse at my current profile. It's obviously empty re: I've moved on.) I know I'm a marked man in this discussion thread but I do urge you all to check out Twitter at the moment. Hundreds of people agree with my basic sentiments. I do think that says something with all this. Either G+ has an actual problem or a PR problem of not enabling pretty smart/engaged people like myself to 'get it.' My two cents on this beautiful morning.
As it stands, my Circles are sparse. The stream of updates has basically run dry -- reduced to one buddy who regularly writes. My initial excitement about signing on and inviting people to join me has waned. Nowadays, I apparently get tired just thinking about it."
But, now that you've Circled me (you did right?), your Ghosttown is about to turn into Durwinville.
+Burnley Wilkins ok, so my point that it is highly populated full of great content is moot if it's photographers and techies? Fortunately it's full of travelers, foodies, journalists, artists, social media, pr and tech pros, politicians, musicians, business people, students. Who else needs to be here for it not to be a niche audience that you're implying it is?
yesterday I had an ongoing political discussion with a dozen folks about government regulation of banks. Not exactly a techie subject. It was not only animated and passionate, but it was full of great differing opinions, links to stories and facts, and juvenile behavior.
This will be a continuing conversation. Every time a larger group of goobers enters this will happen until g+ is mainstream. Or everyone is a pluserista. My stream is already filled with lots of interesting people in all sorts of fields. What I think is the interesting is how long the culture of g+ will stay this way. What I see is that certain personality types have more rewarding experiences. Those who are willing to discover and take initiative versus those who stick to the tried and proven.
+1 for the term "pluserista"! I agree that if you set up a profile, invite a few people who have no interest in using the service and sit back, nothing will happen. Again, no one gets laid. If you actively seek out interesting people, you will find interesting content and discussions.
I don't think +Dan Reimold 's article was bad. It was well written. I just think it's another in a long list of journalists dropping into a social network, making no effort to really try it and writing an attention grabbing headline that it's a ghost town. I'm pretty sure about a thousand journalists said the same about Twitter, Facebook (that it was for kids only), MySpace, AOL, etc. "This has all happened before".
Pick a real topic, like the protestors being arrested on Wall Street.
BTW, I agree with +Steve Pociask that Google is everywhere, not that we're at their mercy, but that we've handed over our anonymity to them with gratitude.
Well, since my company uses Gmail, Google docs, and we do SEO. I can't avoid it.
Ghost town? My stream is overflowing with top-quality content.
I'm always surprised by the references made to G+ not having enough activity. i have more than enough engaging and interesting content to peruse throughout the day.
Add a comment...