This might make me pull the plug for good.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/26/tech/social-media/facebook-users-will-revolt-cashmore/
http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/26/tech/social-media/facebook-users-will-revolt-cashmore/
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
FB
- Thread starter ALLSKIING
- Start date
riverc0il
New member
Sounds pretty dumb to me. I use the site for keeping up with my friends and communicating with them. I don't use it as a scrapbook. Then again, I have a blog for a vain ego page and most people don't so perhaps most folks will like it.
ctenidae
Active member
This will neither increase nor decrease the frequency with which I utilize my YouFace page.
Current interaction is primarily limited to periodic checking for changes to the privacy policy.
Current interaction is primarily limited to periodic checking for changes to the privacy policy.
mondeo
New member
Dear, God, no! Not change! Anything but change!
I tried it actually using that developer hack. It's kind of interesting really... I dunno. I only log on usually once a day for 10 min or so. Some days it's a bit more.
I don't have a problem with change.....Its the type of changes they are making.
Facebook has jumped the shark, as far as I'm concerned. I've cut my usage way back in the last few weeks. I would spend even less time using it if I didn't have to spend several minutes un-"top story"ing all the crap that I don't care about to get to the stories that I care about.
riverc0il
New member
There is an easier way to do that... just friend and like feeds that you actually want to read all of the posts from.
I've been ruthless in not accepting friend requests, not liking and friending casual acquaintances, and removing feeds as soon as I get even a hint of over posting or obnoxious posting. I don't think FB jumps the shark until something better comes along and beats it. Google+ isn't it. FB has made reluctant users even out of those of us that loathe the system and the company. It is doing something right for that to happen. Which is that it unfortunately destroyed every other social networking site. Any ways, I usually get a kick out of people freaking out about change. But not all change is good change. Change for change sake or change to keep up with the Joneses can be bad change. We'll see what happens. The user base with vote on the whether the change is good or bad.
There is an easier way to do that... just friend and like feeds that you actually want to read all of the posts from.
Any ways, I usually get a kick out of people freaking out about change. But not all change is good change. Change for change sake or change to keep up with the Joneses can be bad change. We'll see what happens. The user base with vote on the whether the change is good or bad.
I'm pretty fickle, sometimes I'll read everyone's posts, other times I only want to skim looking for the real important stuff. That said I only have people on my friends list that I want to hear at least something from.
IMHO FB is changing too much too fast just for the sake of change.
I'm holding off complete judgement on the timeline stuff until I see if for myself, but I'm not impressed by what I've seen so far.
ctenidae
Active member
Maybe they're trying to be the Netflix of social media?
Cannonball
New member
Not really. Those of us that loathe the system and the company don't use it. I know far more non-users than users.
Most of the people I know use FB, at least occasionally.
Cannonball
New member
New report says 51% of Americans over 12 use FB.
Another recent report says "half of Americans will be obese by 2030"
coincidence?
:lol: Probably not.
riverc0il
New member
I only know one person in my network of friends that doesn't use FB. My mom isn't on it either. I am a reluctant user of FB only because all my friends jumped shipped from other (better) social networking sites. And when I say "better" I don't mean more or better features. It was better for not being Facebook. :lol:
FB = fat butt?
I've never visited any "social" network...to me, these sites have nothing to do with being social. Sitting in a dark room staring at a boob tube is not social.
But that's me, the old dinosaur.
riverc0il
New member
Agreed. But they are good tools for sharing pictures, video, and links... especially for those without their own web site or blog. Blogging social networking sites are better, IMO, because you don't have a character limit. You can basically open a diary to the world, or those that you choose to let into it. It's not just about what you did or what you are doing... but rather WHY (far more important, IMO). It is still not being "social" but its amazing how much better you can get to know people. Facebook will never ever have that type of depth. It wasn't designed for depth, it was designed to be superficial. Which is why it is so successful, IMO.
ctenidae
Active member
Fb- is the father.
Similar threads
