• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • Multi-AI Governance Blog
    • Responsible AI Blog
    • Digital Factics Blog
    • Legacy Local SEO
  • HAIA
    • SMART
  • Factics
  • Checkpoint-Based Governance
    • What Is an Agent?
  • RECCLIN
  • CAIPR
  • HEQ/AIS
    • AIS pilot data test
  • AI Policy
    • ISO AI Governance Comment

Basil C. Puglisi

Artificial Intelligence (AI) & Digital Marketing Since 2009

  • About Me
    • My Story
      • Appearances for Speaking
  • The Minds That Bend The Machine
  • Governing AI
  • Digital Factics X
  • Digital Factics Instagram
  • AI – Artificial Intelligence
    • Ethical AI – Disclosure
    • AI Literacy & Education
    • AI Learning
      • AI Course Descriptions

Reference.me – A Unique Business Social Site

March 15, 2012 by Basil C. Puglisi Leave a Comment

Since almost every social site claims to be unique, yet there are several floating around that seem to mirror each other, we have come to understand that often ‘unique social site’ in reality means, social site with a unique name. So when I came across Reference.me, I gave it a shot, but without any genuine expectations for uncommon features.

c/o www.domain.me

Trusted Networks

We have other social sites that rely on trusted networks. LinkedIn immediately comes to mind. Currently the largest business social network online, LinkedIn has over 120 million users. Many people use it to connect to business partners and other colleagues, or even employees and customers.

While most of us likely have a LinkedIn account and profile, accept or decline contacts on a daily basis, and even update our profiles when business opportunities change, we usually stop just short of using our LinkedIn profiles outside of a social bookmark on our website or link on our email signatures unless we are in the process of actively building on that network.

How Does Reference.Me Work?

Your trusted network on Reference.me actually comes with a very impressive visual reference of who your trusted network represents. It differs immediately from other social networks in one specific way. Log in is only integrated with Google + currently. However, once signed up, and logged in, you can still easily integrate your Facebook and LinkedIn accounts. Integration with LinkedIn will also fill out many of the details, work references, education, and skills on the Reference.me details tab.

There is no messaging on Reference.me, no activity streams, groups, or anything else you may be called to join in, or at least not yet. That doesn’t mean that Reference.me doesn’t have a shining quality or two at this stage in its development game.

Reference.me Pros

The site already has a great setup when it comes to a quick list and profile viewing opportunity with a few different filter options. Arranging your network by skills, location, companies, strongest connection, or even alphabetically supplies users with the ability to quickly locate members in their network that may not be so readily available on the top of your network. This layering feature is absolutely unique from any other social business network available on the net currently. It provides a more in-depth look at how the rest of your network functions with their own, giving potentially more elaborate insight if browsing the networks of perspective new hires, new colleagues, or even consumers.

The references system on Reference.me is impressive, as well it should be on a social site with such a URL. Grabbing a reference from their system is as easy as clicking on a name and choosing the big tab that pops up. Under the tab you may also see that the source is already a trusted one for you, or that you may need to request them to join your network so that they too receive trusted status on your Reference.me account.

c/o www.growyourbusinessnetwork.com

Reference.me Cons

Reference.me cons are as mostly as listed above. There is no messaging on Reference.me, no activity streams, groups, or anything else you may be called to join in, and for this reason Reference.me may not be seen as a full-bodied network that promotes major interactivity.

Fortunately, this doesn’t seem to be what the team at Reference.me is going for. Reference.me seems like a great place to send a prospective client, employee, or consumer when they ask for references, whole references, and nothing but your references.

Author:

@BasilPuglisi is the Executive Director and Publisher for Digital Brand Marketing Education (dbmei.com). Basil C. Puglisi is also the President of Puglisi Consulting Group, Inc. A Digital Brand Marketing Consultancy that manages professional and personal branding for Fortune 500 CEOs, Hedge Fund Managers and Small Business Owners.

Sources:

  • Reference.Me
  • Reference.Me: Look at Your Business Network, Now Look Again!
  • Reference.me Aims at Resetting Professional Networking

Share this:

  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

Filed Under: Digital Factics Blog, General Tagged With: Chief executive officer, Executive director, facebook, google, Hedge fund, LinkedIn, social network, Uniform Resource Locator

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe

Join 9,585 other subscribers

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Alison Gilbert, Digital Age Storyteller says

    March 19, 2012 at 4:08 am

    Thanks Basil,
    I had actually signed up for this a month or so ago and had left out my rolodex card (where I keep the name, username and password for all my online materials). I meant to check it out again to remind myself what it is for. I have about.me and many other profiles. So I wanted to see just where it fit in the scheme of things.
    I appreciate your explanation so now I understand its place better in the scheme of things.
    Alison

    Loading...
    Reply
  2. Nancy says

    March 21, 2012 at 8:15 pm

    Thanks for the detailed description of this; it seems like I’m hearing about one new social media site per day and the help sorting them out is appreciated.

    Loading...
    Reply
  3. mithuhassan says

    March 21, 2012 at 10:22 pm

    Thanks a lot for sharing and explained the details nicely to make understand easily!! Its really help me a lot to upcoming days !!

    Loading...
    Reply
  4. Gaye Crispin says

    March 21, 2012 at 10:35 pm

    Hi, thank you. I had no knowledge of these sites previously. It’s very interesting.

    Loading...
    Reply
  5. Tammy Johnson says

    March 22, 2012 at 4:07 am

    I think I will give this a shot. It sounds easy enough to use and pretty unique. I would have probably never heard of it if I didn’t come to this site. Great Review. Posting valued references will now be a breeze

    Loading...
    Reply
  6. David Weisser says

    April 3, 2012 at 9:08 am

    Great review. I signed up. Then I read some other posts about how reference.me will spam everyone in your connected email addresses. Yikes. I quickly deleted my account.
    Even if the spamming was a glitch that is now fixed. I don’t really see anything new here. Great interface – and some smart technology, to be sure. But what’s the upshot? In the end, it’s another social networking site that does little to advance your cause. Check out solidreference.com for a truly unique alternative.

    Loading...
    Reply

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe via Email

Join 9,585 other subscribers
iDBasil C. Puglisi on ORCID

Buy the eBook on Amazon

This is an banner ad for the book Governing AI When Capability Exceeds Control
Buy the book Digital Factics on Amazon

Advanced Site Search

Responsible AI (#AIgenerated by Agents)

India’s Telecom Regulator Would Require a Designated Officer’s Approval Before Any AI System Is Used #AIg

TRAI’s draft guidelines on responsible AI in telecom would require a designated officer to approve every AI system before use and make operators accountable for vendor-built AI. They say less about who rules on outputs once a system is running. Comments are due November 27.

Only a Quarter of UK Workers Always Verify AI Answers. Who Decides Which Ones Count? #AIg

O’Reilly found that only 24% of UK employees always verify AI-generated answers, and 39% of those using them have acted on one that proved wrong. Perceptyx and RGP point to the missing piece: deciding which AI outputs need a named person’s ruling.

New AI Certificates for Doctors and Teachers Teach Checking. Do They Certify It? #AIg

Google launched an AI certificate for healthcare professionals that takes under five hours and carries up to 5.0 CME credits, and Scale and UMSL launched a 12-hour microcredential for teachers. Both teach evaluation of AI output. A European teacher framework asks for evidence of it, and employers can too.

OpenAI Built Four Layers to Watch Its Agents. Human Paging Mostly Keeps Business Hours #AIg

OpenAI’s October 29 post describes up to four automated layers that watch its agents, then discloses that human paging runs at any hour only for highest-priority alerts on frontier training runs, during business hours for most other traffic, and is currently off for internal Codex. For enterprise deployments, alerts go to the customer’s own webhook, and on our reading so does the decision.

House Democrats Ask AI Labs for Incident Reports Within 48 Hours of Discovery #AIg

Letters dated October 27 ask five frontier AI companies for a full accounting of misalignment incidents by November 11 and notice within 48 hours of discovery. None of the fourteen requested items asks who inside a company decides a flagged event is an incident, and that decision is what starts the clock.

A New Jersey Bill Takes Reasonable Care Off the Table for Chatbot Injuries #AIg

New Jersey’s A5607, reported out of committee on October 19, would make a chatbot a product and hold its provider liable for any injury to a user from its use, even after all reasonable care. The monthly harm assessment it requires still needs a named person to decide what the numbers mean.

Europe Proposes Free Access to the Standards Behind AI Act Compliance #AIg

The European Commission proposed on October 6 to make standards referenced in EU law free to read, speed up how they are requested and assessed, and write its own common specifications when standards bodies run late. With EN 18286 now the first AI Act standard, the question is what a faster standard can certify.

More Posts from this Category

#SMAC #SocialMediaWeek

Basil Social Media Week

Legacy Print:

Digital Factics: Twitter

© 2009–2026 Basil C. Puglisi, Creator of Factics™ and the HAIA Ecosystem

%d