Rheingold on Facebook
Posted 9/04/2007 08:08:00 AM |
I am getting half a dozen Facebook friend requests a day from people who claim not to remember friending me. When I complained in my status message, another Facebooker told me that the “Friend Finder” overrides user privacy settings and spams friend requests via users’ gmail contact lists. Between that and the really awful message board feature that renders groups near meaningless, I’m beginning to conclude that Facebook growth will start slowing, then stagnate, and eventually it will die a slow death. It’s too much work to respond to friend requests, too little ability to set my own boundaries, too many silly apps, and not enough return on the investment of my time. They seriously should have taken the big money when it was offered. If Facebook founders think they are going to be the “social operating system of the web,” they are delusional. They won’t even be AOL. It’s definitely an interesting fad at that moment, and if I ignore all demands on my attention, it can be a useful broadcast channel. But as an online social network, it’s sinking itself.
Howard's point about "return on investment" is essential. Facebook distanced itself from competition because it delivered relevant social information in a sleek, efficient manner. As networks expand and my messages and newsfeeds get spammed, I get a lot less signal per noise. Facebook should refocus on delivering relevant social information without spam. There is a very clear inverse relationship between spamminess and information utility - FB should be mindful of that.
Permalink |
|
to this post
View blog reactions | Post to
2 Comments: (Post a Comment)
-
At September 04, 2007 11:21 AM,
Sam said...
-
Howard Rheingold is a really interesting guy...he was part of the original social media movement. It's strange that more people don't discuss the historical roots of web 2.0 and online communities...
http://www.leveragingideas.com/?p=436 -
At September 05, 2007 9:16 AM,
Bertil said...
-
Rheingold, boyd and many other web stars, who made a big name by being friendly. I thing the problem is not Facebook interface: 99.8% of their users do not have this issue. None of my friends have the problem, and some, like you, are great bloggers.
The key remaining stars should be clear about their "Facebook friend"-ing policy at first, publicly, on their blogs: anyone, my reader, my close relatives, people I've shaken hands with, whose name ring a bell, with whom I talked for more then an hour, etc. They should adapt their privacy option to that status: Rheingold's account is probably more public then he himself wishes, and he's the only one who can set it back to normal. Facebook can only offer him the option, and try to make it clear; I thing they did a great job in being understandable and relevant.
About spam, I've seen some comments about it, rarely anything completely off (some obvious ads for booze on party Groups)--but more importantly, I've seen many "Report" buttons, everywhere, for any thing. Any spam should be very easy to spot: more then 50% report per view, statistical analysis of content, banning users producing too much spam, and investigating their friends. . . There are tons of algorithmic, cheap and efficient solutions that need to be set up, based on the current wave--but can it become uncontrollable? Wouldn't an "invitation only" process take care of the worst scenario?
