Comments on: Note to Squidoo: Facebook Is STILL Evil

By: Mrwrkathm

Mrwrkathm — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 05:04:26 +0000

Hi Greekgeek,

I completely agree with you and your stance. I have never been comfortable with sites such as FB and others because they ask too many questions. I refuse to give my info. to anyone, including the CIA, NSA, or the New World Order. That’s one reason that I use a pseudonym and a crazy picture instead of my real name and photo – you just don’t know who will do what with them. I have never joined FB, and never will. Simply put, I only trust the web so far and no more. Putting your info out in public makes you vulnerable. I also hate the way that FB is pervading every site on the net! Every site now has an FB button – why? Why log in with FB or Google when I am on a completely different site? Simple – FB wants to know every site you visit in order to get to know what you like and what you do! That’s dangerous!!!

By: CrossCreations

CrossCreations — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 12:36:33 +0000

‘Internet Privacy’ seems a good example of an oxymoron… you know expression that use opposite words such as ‘jumbo shrimp’ etc. Can the internet BE private? This applies particularly to FB of course, and yes facebook has exploded in popularity and with that some controversial privacy issues. Still I think twice about what I release anywhere on the internet, assuming that once I do so, then it is no longer private. On one hand we bust our butts for ‘traffic’ and then at the same time want privacy, so how does THAT work? Aren’t these polar opposites? Can we realistically expect both?
Great discussion, appreciate you all so much.

By: Rhonda

Rhonda — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 11:45:06 +0000

Thanks Ellen. This helps to clarify what it is all about. I was a bit confused when I saw the word “opportunity” on my Squidoo dashboard, but seeked out a bit more info. Glad I found your blog.

By: Greekgeek

Greekgeek — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 08:31:18 +0000

All right. But I still get antsy every time I see FB thrust in my face, and I’ll continue to remind HQ that not all of us are going to be on Facebook, each time I get offers on my dashboard telling me about some fabulous new Squidoo project, only to find that I have to go log into Facebook to access its Facebook page. Deal?

And I needed to say this, to remind people not to get too complacent about Facebook’s data collection. OR Google, which has definitely moved away from its roots as “search engine” to “revenue engine.”

We keep jumping when they say frog. And sometimes we have to. But sometimes we have a choice, even when we think we don’t.

By: Greekgeek

Greekgeek — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 08:19:38 +0000

No. I still participate in huge online communities where privacy works just fine, and always has. Google’s circles almost manage to copy the functionality of Livejournal, Dreamwidth et alia, whose custom friendslists, groups, and usernames do a more sophisticated yet simple job of managing our friends and filtering our content-sharing than any of the 2.0 social networks have done thus far. Google+ was an incomplete implementation of these basic principles of these older, pre-MySpace social communities, and so Web 1.5 continues to bubble away, invisible to those who have arrived on the scene a little more recently.

The web also existed before AOL tried to own it. AOL had a good run of trying to own it, and making sure that most people could only access the web via AOL, but it was the wrong paradigm, and it could not hold people inside its walled garden forever. Sooner or later, they would discover the web was more and better than what AOL offered them, and they broke away.

For a while, Internet Explorer tried to own the web by forcing non-standard codes we all had to use in order for our webpages to be viewable on computers with IE. Every PC was shipped with IE. It was predicted that we had to use IE standards, or we’d lose. But slowly, gradually, Mozilla and Safari and Opera and, yes, Chrome, proved that was not so.

I refuse to cede the web to its least deserving custodian. It doesn’t work. It hasn’t been around that long. I refuse to believe the web has reached its final form, and we’re stuck with something that doesn’t work for billions of its users.

After all, Facebook doesn’t even exist in a large part of the world. It’s short-sighted to believe this is the best we’re going to get.

By: Mark Upshaw

Mark Upshaw — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:45:19 +0000

Pandora’s box has been opened and can not be closed again. To fight against the inevitable is a waste of precious resources: time and talent. Isn’t it better to receive the “mark of the beast” and reap whatever benefits now than to hold out for a “privacy savior” that will never appear.

By: MiMi

MiMi — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:55:18 +0000

Absolutely revile FB because of its privacy issues and because they allow children on it. Letting them sign up is easy. All they have to do is lie about their age — a despicable failure at FB to take societal responsibility. However, FB or not, at this point, there is not a single user online that cannot become a victim by some form of privacy invasion. …And after the rant, for Squidoo to look for more avenues of traffic is probably a good thing, especially if they work with more than one Internet site. But I am sorely disappointed in the loss of social at Squidoo. It summarily destroyed the focus on community and creativity.

By: Lisa Howard

Lisa Howard — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:58:12 +0000

Zuckerbergian? I hope that gets added to the dictionary!

I’m not in your camp on this one because I like Facebook, flaws and all, but I am glad that you’re spearheading the discussion on the pros and cons. We are all free to choose how to promote our sites and pages, and I like knowing what I’m doing and why.

When the Open Graph tag first popped up on my dashboard, there was no link explaining what it was, so I ignored it. Then I found the discussion on FB (sorry!), which led me to SquidU and then later to the HQ post. Then it was FB that led me back to this page. See why I like FB?

I don’t think Squidoo is penalizing anyone for not liking FB. Unless they add the Open Graph tag to the lensrank algorithm or do something else that would actually take away from your own efforts, then they aren’t penalizing you. I think Squidoo is actually very good about giving people options. They didn’t automatically add Open Graph tags, which they could have automated from lens tags. They let people opt out of the magazines that get promoted on FB. They even let people opt out of ads to make money!

I’m glad everyone has options, and I’m also glad that there are people like you who want everyone to be aware of the possible consequences of any action. From there, it’s up to each person to make their own choice.

By: giltotherescue

giltotherescue — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:42:28 +0000

The search engine market is absolutely monopolized by Google. At Squidoo, we believe it’s important to give lensmasters the tools to succeed on other platforms in order to decrease reliance on a single source of traffic.

The goal of Open Graph tagging is to help Facebook understand the type of content that is being shared. It’s not much different from the way meta and schema.org tags are applied for SEO purposes.

It’s just one tool in the chest. Completely optional. If you prefer not to associate with Facebook, there are no negative consequences.

By: lakeerieartists

lakeerieartists — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:25:45 +0000

Lots of good points here. I originally joined Facebook to watch what my teenage daughter did on the site. Now I use it to publicize my gallery. But I have always been leery of joining apps because they are asking me for too much information.

While I like the idea that I can follow my distant relatives and friends that I do not see too often to keep up with their doings, I do have a threshold of privacy that I would like to keep to myself.

I honestly do not yet see how the Open Graph helps drive traffic to my Squidoo articles.