It is easy to dismiss this initial view by simply saying that there is so much that it leaves out that it couldn't possibly be valid. The first thing to note is that the democratizing aspect of virtual meeting places is not perfect. It is nice to say that there now exists a situation where people can gather and discuss ideas without having to worry about being judged on who they are rather that what they are saying. What, then, can be said about people who may have brilliant ideas, but less of a grasp on the English language (for this discussion will be limited to the realm of English speaking society), for example, people for whom English is a second language? In cases such as this, it is possible for the speaker to come across as, well, stupid. I do not, however, think that this invalidates the entire virtual community in its current form. It merely points out a very basic problem.

There is also the argument that states that these meetings are not valid because they are limited to a group of people who are in a certain socioeconomic group, specifically those who can afford the technology. This too, while a valid concern. But again, I do not believe that this takes away from the value of the computer as a forum for discussion and communication.