I started using Facebook over a year ago, when the popular, social networking web site decided to open the doors to everyone. I know what you're thinking. I'm OLD. What the hell am I doing on Facebook?
Well, people, first of all, you are only as old as you feel. I didn't register to feel younger. At first, I logged on to keep in touch with my college-aged son. Some of his friends and teachers signed up to be my Facebook friends. Then my high school-aged daughter discovered it, and of course, she needed constant monitoring.
In the meantime, I've connected with several people there with similar interests. I've found people I went to high school with, and a bunch of Internet friends from another social networking web site who had jumped that sinking ship (heretofore anonymous) and headed over to Facebook.
I also use Facebook to plug my articles here at Blogcritics and elsewhere.
Any web site takes some getting used to. Facebook was rather easy at first. As social networking sites go, there are always some quirks and foibles. I don't expect any software or platform to be 100% perfect. But Facebook was relatively hassle free and user friendly, even for a geezer like me.
But, there were changes looming on the horizon.
A month or so ago, Facebook users were confronted with the "new" Facebook. It looked like Facebook, but the boxes were bigger and in different places. At the time, there was an option to toggle back and forth between "old" and "new" - and guess what I chose? Yup, "old" Facebook.
Last week, Facebook no longer gave its users the option. There was only "new" Facebook and nothing else.
A new slogan can be heard around the Internet. Facebook: Teaching an old dog new tricks.
In the last week, users have complained of having their accounts closed because of TOS violations. The biggest "reason" given was that the person had two or more accounts, and plainly you can only have one. The problem was that, with the two people I knew with deleted accounts, both only had ONE account. On the other hand, I know someone who has two accounts, both using ficticious names, and neither of his accounts have been deleted.
Article comments
1 - Matthew T. Sussman
A boycott is just, well ... dumb. When a group says "we don't like it." OK, great. What don't you like about it? That's not how software improves itself.
Gawker Media just revamped their commenting system. People hated it. Editors implored readers/commenters to respond with specific criticisms. They were addressed and changes were made.
Joanne, you should probably copy/paste this article to the feedback e-mail, whatever that e-mail may be.
2 - Joanne Huspek
Thanks, Matthew, I'll do that.
The problem with "boycotts" of social networking web sites is that they never produce any results. I know, I've been there before. For every person that leaves, there are scores more who come to see what the hoopla is all about. So the page views and clicks remain the same or increase during the turmoil.
Most people don't read the TOS before signing up for such web sites. They think they have a voice in shaping the site, when actually they are using it for free and must adhere to the rules.
I don't have a problem with Facebook (or any of the other sites). I know the limitations, and am willing to work within them.