In Howard Rheingold's The Virtual Community, he stresses that those critical of virtual communities often are focusing on the wrong people.

Critics often focus on the few people who are addicted to virtual worlds or those who use them in abusive or destructive manners. However, this is most likely not the majority of virtual community goers. Rheingold rightfully acknowledges that this simply is not a fair way of critiquing the virtual sphere. We don't associate the actions of alcoholics with anyone who drinks alcohol, nor do we associate coffee drinkers with coffee addicts (or worse, all stimulant addicts such those dependent on cocaine or amphetamines). Instead, users of objects or ideas need to be considered as a whole or by using the "average" user.

Virtual communities have many legitimate uses for those who use them properly. Rheingold points out many examples of when people reached out to their virtual community and received aid. These are the cases that should be taken into account as well when evaluating these communities - especially because I feel these are probably the more common uses of these communities.

Sure, people can have problems, such as addiction, with virtual communities, but just like any other object we don't judge all users based on the few. Instead, we treat those people on an individual basis or add safeguards to help prevent such issues.