I acknowledge what Duncan says, but I don't know is this new observation of any kind or unusual at any level? Just acknowledging how it goes. My assumption is, that this would be the same or related what has been done in in underground or culture since forever. You know, reading a zine and then being certainly somehow effected by what it said. Making choices or purchase etc.
Some take it even as almost sole purpose. Noisextra. Who mentioned their idea of getting people excited to talk about noise and their favorites. Or talked by Sienko in Noisextra interview. Someone talking about noise, the sort of story telling of noise, indeed adds something into abstract. It can be the cover, titles, or anything related, but it may be also review one read, discussion one had. None of this means that one would be forced to buy, or forced to like and agree. It is often reminder, that beyond label hyperbole and desperate attempts to move product, there is also actual listeners who have barely anything to "gain" from praising item they like.
It is observation over many years, that when one guy says something, bunch of guys will respond. They may not start topic about "best Merzbow of 2020", but if someone starteded it and wrote compliments, you can bet that there will be handful who will agree or share their opinion of something else. I absolutely can not see what would be the negative in this. I don't see it as sign of any unhealthy herd mentality either. For me, it is how underground works. Network of some sort of associates/contacts who tell others what item rules and that they should check it out. They may also tell what is pretty sucky release and should not be the one you waste your last money. Should there be more people, who confidently voice their opinion on release? Perhaps, yes. For example Noisextra has underlined this to be one of the motivations. To get people to talk about noise and favorite recordings. Give others recommendations, without it being really for their own benefit.
What I do not particularly like, is that there is a level of dishonesty to be seen - perhaps even more so in "free digital music". Lets say, there is project that uploads material online. Their friend raves how great it is and how great these guys are. You go to listen, and without single doubt can conclude that what a waste of time. Utter garbage. You could be sure that if anyone was to be asked, would they buy this LP. Actually pay and hunt for recording, they would most likely conclude: hell no. And no amount of praise would change that.
So these kind of small talk/ass kissing between the friends, seems to me annoying. It is vastly different category (I'd define that as "social scene underground") than people hearing what they appreciate, which turns out to be so good they feel they barely could live without it in shelves, hah.. (which is the more traditional noise network underground).
I recall when RRRon was totally blown out by fact that people were fighting against mp3 blogs. Requesting their stuff being removed from blogs, torrents and sites. He concluded that back in the day, it was that urge what created underground. One would hear something so brilliant, that he would not shut up. He would make dubs to people, xerox, send letters, talk to anyone who was barely willing to listen that check out THIS. Fast forward decade or couple and people were trying to limit any "non official" spreading and perhaps even dialogue about material... Being annoyed that people knew about existence of some recordings, for example. Of course there is difference between fans and rip off file sellers, but mentality is still revealing change.
How to get more people talk and interact? Is it even mandatory? I'm pretty sure it is semi-futile attempt. We live in reality, where just about anyone will join "post 10 favorite album covers, no comments" -facebook challenge, but if they would have to actually say anything, it won't happen. It seems we just have to settle that there are handful of people who have urge to write or talk about things.
