In the cutthroat world of social networking, Chris Hughes is something of an outlier. Having made his millions as a founder of Facebook in the Dustin Moskovitz, Eduardo Saverin mold (and quite unlike the Winklevoss twins), he decided to do something good with his money, and coordinated online organizing for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign through the My.BarackObama.com website.

With that goal achieved, in February 2010 Hughes went on to start Jumo.com, a social networking site designed to help its users “find organizations and similarly minded people working on important causes here in the United States and across the world.”

Hughes described the motivation behind Jumo, writing, “We were frustrated by the lack of opportunities to get involved with the issues and organizations we care about. How many times have you read an article or seen that video and wanted to help but just didn’t know how?”  He wanted to make it easier for people, “to find, follow and support the issues and organizations important to you, whether that’s the soup kitchen down the street or a girls’ school in rural Kenya.”

It was a great idea, but despite an infusion of grants into the 501(c)3 (nonprofit) site, it never really took off. Rather than simply shut down shop, Hughes transferred Jumo to his GOOD co-founder Ben Goldhirsh, an old friend from their days together in Phillips Academy. The official announcement said that “GOOD is purchasing Jumo assets for an undisclosed sum.” According to BetaBeat, that sum was $0 plus an opportunity for Hughes to serve as an advisor for GOOD.

The question to be asked is why Jumo failed, especially since its founders had two major successes under his belt—Facebook and getting a president elected. Some suggest that it was the design of the site, described as being “as ugly as a shaved rabbit.” There was also the question of how it actually helped charities, beyond simply providing information about them, which could be obtained in many other ways, including through their Facebook pages.

Most of all, Jumo didn’t require any particular actions from its users.  In that case, it mimicked Facebook, except that instead of clicking “Like” to a piece about 400,000 children starving in Somalia, the user got to click “Care.” Then again, most people don’t “like” the idea of thousands of starving children, and if they don’t “care” about them, they are probably heartless SOBs.

But there is a long way to go between simply caring about a problem and doing something to fix it. GOOD may have the answer to that. While it already has a magazine and website,  it does want to expand its online community and improve its technology. Jumo may be the perfect solution.

But Jumo (and GOOD) may face another challenge, as sagely pointed out by Stephen Colbert in an interview with Hughes. Social networking is all about, “me, me, me,” while Jumo is about, “you, you, you.” Perhaps people aren’t ready for that.

Read More at BetaBeat
Read More at Mashable
Read More at Chris Hughes’s blog