Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but a Straw-man Argument is an argument where you replace your opponent's point with a similar (but different) point that is easier to refute. In theses cases, the point being replaced is the legitimacy of facebook based on an aspect of it's nature. Your point (strip club) is easy to defeat because there is no other legitimate reason to attend a strip club except /entertainment/ (and and food, I suppose). Those are not good enough reasons for me to go to a strip club (and apparently you). In fact, if those things were available without the pressure to hand over money top performers, I would probably still not go. Even without the perceived negative, there are not enough positives to draw me.
My counter example, (Casino) has enough positives to draw me (magic shows, Slot machines, Blackjack) all of these things I happily participate in with or without the pressure inherent.
But neither of these actually address the matter of Facebook, which is why they are straw-men. If examine in the light of our arguments, however, it would appear that you are saying the inherent pressure to overshare on facebook (or friendster, our initial discussion) invalidates any usefulness for facebook. My responses is that that pressure must be viewed in conjunction with the other benefits gain by the software and only to the extent that that pressure has an effect. Facebook does allow me to easily contact old friend who I would otherwise be unable to contact due to lost/changed numbers, Allows me to play games, and is a handy reminder to myself of important dates in my past (Updating my rèsumè, I have often used my facebook account to remember when i left certain jobs). Yes, I can use other solutions to achieve these goods, but I find the minimal cost of a little pressure well worth the gain. Perhaps you are saying that any such gain could never, for yourself, out weigh the cost of that presure? If that is the case, I wonder why you value the pressure so highly.
Re: Moynihan, I then apologize. My ignorance got the best of me. And that you for the read. I haven't had a chance yet to read all of it, but so far it is facinating... "Deviant persons can be said to supply needed services to society." Interesting. I haven't actually made it to his response, just simple through his summary of a few points others have made. I am looking forward to it.