Google+

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Click the gear in the upper right hand corner.

Google+ settings

Profile and privacy.

Edit network visability.

"Show people who have added you in circles."

Uncheck.

Save.

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I get that. But I see no way to prevent someone from broadcasting to the world that he has some association or connection to me. Am I wrong about that?

He can do that with or without google+.

[cuervo72]

"People understand this." Well...we're trying to grasp it and don't completely yet. The public-at-large is going to understand it however?

And are some tabloids going to care how a name got where?

10:12:11 am [cuervo72]: ah, there is a check box for "show people who have added you to circles" at least
10:12:38 am [Morgado]: So you can prevent Hooker in the Circle, but you cannot prevent the In The Hooker
Circle problem
10:12:39 am [cuervo72]: (just found it)
10:13:24 am [cuervo72]: Account Settings -> Network Visibility
10:14:34 am [Morgado]: That only controls who you show the world is in your circles
10:14:50 am [Morgado]: You cannot prevent someone else from putting you publcily in their circle that they
control on their profile
10:15:10 am [Morgado]: In the Hooker Circle
10:15:29 am [Morgado]: So it gives unsavory folks the power to slime anyone by association
10:15:30 am [cuervo72]: AT the hooker's page, yes I suppose
10:15:35 am [Morgado]: right
10:15:46 am [Morgado]: And if you're TMZ, whose page are you looking at?
10:15:51 am [Morgado]: Not Eliot Spitzer's page
10:16:46 am [Morgado]: TMZ is looking at this Ashley Dupre page that their bottomfeeder viewers are tweeting
them about
10:17:01 am [Morgado]: "Hey look, Spitzer is in her circle"
10:18:14 am [Morgado]: Granted, if the girl is a prostitute, you would think she would keep the Johns out of
their circles... but not the most brilliant of rocket scientists
10:18:30 am [cuervo72]: heh
10:18:52 am [Morgado]: see: Anthony Weiner's OOPSIE fat finger error
10:19:23 am [Morgado]: message from Ashley to Spitzer - "I must have clicked the wrong box in the privacy
settings... my bad"

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I'm with Jeff. As Google+ gets bigger, people will understand that these relationships are one-way, not two-way. Everyone is just so used to Facebook's model that it is not intuitive to think it can happen some other way.

edit: Similar to how it wouldn't be a story if "the hooker" were following Obama on Twitter.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by stevew

Anyways, it's amazing that someone rapes/etc and is out of jail in the time that I've been out of HS.

Just looked up his record online. He served 17 1/2 years, and that after already having been convicted of what I assume is a felony (aggravated assault.)

Originally Posted by GDC

OFFENSE: KIDNAPPING
CONVICTION COUNTY: MUSCOGEE COUNTY
CRIME COMMIT DATE: 04/07/1992
SENTENCE LENGTH: 18 YEARS, 0 MONTHS, 0 DAYS


OFFENSE: RAPE
CONVICTION COUNTY: MUSCOGEE COUNTY
CRIME COMMIT DATE: 04/07/1992
SENTENCE LENGTH: 18 YEARS, 0 MONTHS, 0 DAYS


OFFENSE: AGGRAV SODOMY
CONVICTION COUNTY: MUSCOGEE COUNTY
CRIME COMMIT DATE: 04/07/1992
SENTENCE LENGTH: 18 YEARS, 0 MONTHS, 0 DAYS


OFFENSE: ARMED ROBBERY
CONVICTION COUNTY: MUSCOGEE COUNTY
CRIME COMMIT DATE: 04/07/1992
SENTENCE LENGTH: 18 YEARS, 0 MONTHS, 0 DAYS


OFFENSE: AGGRAV ASSAULT
CONVICTION COUNTY: MUSCOGEE COUNTY
CRIME COMMIT DATE: 06/12/1988
SENTENCE LENGTH: 5 YEARS, 36 MONTHS, 0 DAYS

STATE OF GEORGIA - PRIOR SENTENCES

STATE OF GEORGIA - INCARCERATION HISTORY

[DaddyTorgo]

Wow. Real savory character there.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by jeff061

He can do that with or without google+.

Sure, but Google+ or FB or any other social network certainly makes it much more easy/convenient.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

...people will understand...

You lost me right there. As I said earlier in this thread, I strongly suspect that you're vastly underestimating the stupidity of the average American.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Everyone understands how it works on Twitter. What am I missing? There's always confusion around new technologies, but eventually even the stupid average American learns how Facebook works.

[JonInMiddleGA]

"But, Jaybo, *why* did you kill *everybody* in the house?"

"They was home."

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

"But, Jaybo, *why* did you kill *everybody* in the house?"

"They was home."

You win the thread, sir!

That was my first R-rated movie. Saw it in the theater. I talked my older brother into taking me. ("Come on Rob, I'm in Junior High. It's just cussin'! I hear that every day!!!") We told our parents we were going to see "House Of Wax." Good times.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Everyone understands how it works on Twitter. What am I missing? There's always confusion around new technologies, but eventually even the stupid average American learns how Facebook works.

Right, but Facebook was new. *I* get how it's different, but the average idiot won't. He/she will assume that it's just like Facebook.

[cuervo72]

I'm not sure everyone understands Twitter, even. I personally don't deal with twitter, but get the concept. But does that 60yo mom in Missouri? The donut shop worker in Jersey? The 70yo retiree in Florida?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

You win the thread, sir!

It's somewhat remarkable how similar our developmental experiences were (although I didn't see it in the theater, the role in our lives was close enough to count I think).

Actually, it really isn't particularly shocking nor all that remarkable to me & you - we already know it & largely understand why it's like that - but I bet it still shocks the crap out of some people

[cuervo72]

I wonder if folks like this understand how social media (or much of anything really) works.

Chouteau, Oklahoma, Casey Anthony Look Alike Assaulted - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports |

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I'm not sure everyone understands Twitter, even. I personally don't deal with twitter, but get the concept. But does that 60yo mom in Missouri? The donut shop worker in Jersey? The 70yo retiree in Florida?

This

The average person would look at a Twitter account (from the user side) and think "WTH is this shit" and have the same confusion about following vs followers that we're talking about here.

Trust me, I've tried to explain it to enough clients to know that there's plenty of confusion out there when it comes to Twitter.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I'm not sure everyone understands Twitter, even. I personally don't deal with twitter, but get the concept. But does that 60yo mom in Missouri? The donut shop worker in Jersey? The 70yo retiree in Florida?

Yes, and there's the image of the grandfather who puts "Delete Profile" on his facebook page to try to remove his profile.

Why do we care about these people?

[Alan T]

I think some of the technical savvy people in this thread far overestimate the technical savvy of the common every day person.

We see it every day in the 6pm news on television, or in newspapers or pretty much any other mainstream media, where things are reported grossly incorrectly due to a lack of understanding how some technical component works. Thats not even talking about the media who purposely try to slander others just to sell magazines or what not.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Yes, and there's the image of the grandfather who puts "Delete Profile" on his facebook page to try to remove his profile.
Why do we care about these people?

Because most of us know them, interact with a certain amount of them, AND (rather relevant in this case) because we're talking about something that's apparently supposed to compete with FB ... which has managed to capture a reasonable chunk of those people.

On a side note that I was about to post anyway & it might as well just go in this post:

I believe that FB has already set the standard in terms of how mainstream social interaction is "supposed" to work, connections are mutual two-way relationships. FB has now hit as high as 65% penetration in the U.S., Twitter just hit a new high at 13% ... which relationship model do you figure is going to seem "right" to most people?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Yes, and there's the image of the grandfather who puts "Delete Profile" on his facebook page to try to remove his profile.

Why do we care about these people?

It goes back to what I said in, I think, my first post in the thread--it depends on who's in your circle of friends/acquaintances. This is a board of text sim geeks--on the high end of functionality when it comes to this sort of thing, and early adapters. My suspicion is that a number of people on this board tend to interact socially (and online) with those who are quite similar. That's just not my online experience at all.



Twitter, according to this page, is used by only 13% of online Americans. And that survey appears to include people like me, who have an account but never use it.

[Ben E Lou]

Heh. Three cross-posts saying basically the same thing. Yeah, what Alan and Jon said.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I agree with these points. What I would say is that five years ago no one was on Facebook. Now, it's everywhere. People obviously can adapt to new ideas, even the "stupid, average" ones.

Jon's point about FB defining social interaction on the net is an interesting one, although I'm not sure it's true.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs2

Jon's point about FB defining social interaction on the net is an interesting one, although I'm not sure it's true.

It also probably needs a caveat, or an expansion or something. My intent was to point out the standard for the average person in the general population, not early adopters/tech savvy/etc.

The majority of the country has now at least seen how it works & for many it represents their only exposure to anything we'd call "social media" ... and those folks are still the key to reaching the level of "social phenomenon" vs "latest trendy thing online"

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Its just a change people will get used to(for the better imho). Its not any different than twitter. Who's circles you are in is just people that want to hear what you say, not vice versa.

Exactly. Google+ is not the same as Facebook. If someone puts you in their circle, that means you can see what they post (in your "Incoming" Stream), but they can't see what you post unless you add them to a circle. So I think people would realize that simply putting someone in a circle doesn't mean anything.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I believe that FB has already set the standard in terms of how mainstream social interaction is "supposed" to work, connections are mutual two-way relationships. FB has now hit as high as 65% penetration in the U.S., Twitter just hit a new high at 13% ... which relationship model do you figure is going to seem "right" to most people?

On the other hand, everyone and their mothers on TV says you can follow me on Twitter at @xxxx - do people think that means they becoming like Facebook friends with the anchor on CNN?

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

This

The average person would look at a Twitter account (from the user side) and think "WTH is this shit" and have the same confusion about following vs followers that we're talking about here.

Trust me, I've tried to explain it to enough clients to know that there's plenty of confusion out there when it comes to Twitter.

But that's because they don't use Twitter. If they did they'd understand it. Same goes for Google+.

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

You lost me right there. As I said earlier in this thread, I strongly suspect that you're vastly underestimating the stupidity of the average American.

People understood Facebook once they started using it. People who had a reason to use Twitter understood that and people will understand Google.

It's different, not difficult.

[Ben E Lou]

Jeff, seriously, what makes you think they'd get that far???

1. "WTH is this shit."
2. {click on bookmark to head back to FB}*











*---Well, probably not smart enough to have a bookmark. That should probably read "2. {type in www.facebook.com} and hit 'ENTER'"

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by jeff061

People understood Facebook once they started using it. People who had a reason to use Twitter understood that and people will understand Google.

It's different, not difficult.

You really seem to be making my point for me. The people I'm talking about have no *reason*--at least as best I can tell--to go through the hassle of switching to G+.

[jeff061]

Not right now, no. I think we are in agreement that most people will need to have a decent amount of the people they converse with using it. Otherwise they will do exactly what you said.

I'm very impressed you've put it through it's paces as much as you have .

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

You really seem to be making my point for me. The people I'm talking about have no *reason*--at least as best I can tell--to go through the hassle of switching to G+.

Yeah, like I said, we agree on this. The initial push will likely come from more tech savvy users and hopefully spreads outward from there. Or maybe it never will. Who knows. But yeah, Facebook isn't going to crumble this year even in any best case Google+ scenario.

I do think the way that circles are set up, and other stuff as well, encourages a far larger social network than Facebook does. What would the point of a Facebook clone be?

[Ryan S]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I get that. But I see no way to prevent someone from broadcasting to the world that he has some association or connection to me. Am I wrong about that?

I would use the feedback link and suggest that they make some changes to allow you to remove yourself from an undesirable user's public profile without notifying the user that something has been done.

[Ben E Lou]

Well, like I said, I *want* it to work. And for my interaction with my text sim geek interwebs buddies, I could easily see it overtaking FB. But for posting pics from the neighborhood BBQ where the sweet-but-dense neighborhood ladies can see them, or for staying in touch with hundreds of former YL kids, I can't imagine that I'd be leaving FB.

[stevew]

Larger thought. Sex offenders have to register in many states due to penalties, etc. Why don't these people also have to register if they are going to be a part of online social communities. I guess they don't just sit around and dream of getting to go make some fresh rape. However it's just something that strikes me as odd.

[jeff061]

No, someone needs to run with it, champion, and grow it until there's enough people for ma and pa to leave for it. But if they just made it identical to Facebook no one would even bother running with it from the start.

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by stevew

Larger thought. Sex offenders have to register in many states due to penalties, etc. Why don't these people also have to register if they are going to be a part of inline social communities. I guess they don't just sit around and dream if getting to go make some fresh rape. However it's just something that strikes me as odd.

Yeah that's a good question. I know Facebook caught some heat and did something about it. I forget the whole story.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Yeah, like I said, we agree on this. The initial push will likely come from more tech savvy users and hopefully spreads outward from there.

Well yeah, that is the point. Tech savvy users first (they are still working on it, of course) and then it spreads after that base.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Exactly. Google+ is not the same as Facebook. If someone puts you in their circle, that means you can see what they post (in your "Incoming" Stream), but they can't see what you post unless you add them to a circle. So I think people would realize that simply putting someone in a circle doesn't mean anything.

That isn't right, though. I can see updates from everyone I put in my circle even if they haven't put me in theirs...unless they change the setting to not post to everyone. I don't see posts from people who I haven't put in a circle.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BrianD

I can see updates from everyone I put in my circle even if they haven't put me in theirs...unless they change the setting to not post to everyone. I don't see posts from people who I haven't put in a circle.

This is how I understood it was supposed to work ... much like Twitter really, if you've got an account & post something then anyone who "follows" you can see it.

If I understand the setup correctly, me putting someone in a circle = me "following" them ... right?

And all it takes to be "followed" (or "circled") is for me to be able to find your account through some means - searching, knowing your gmail address, whatever ... right?

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by BrianD

That isn't right, though. I can see updates from everyone I put in my circle even if they haven't put me in theirs...unless they change the setting to not post to everyone. I don't see posts from people who I haven't put in a circle.

Well yeah, if they are posting to public they are giving access to everyone. You could still read his posts by visiting his profile, all the circle does is add it to your feed. Even Facebook worked this way, you give access to everyone, well then people who are not your friends can read it.

[jeff061]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

This is how I understood it was supposed to work ... much like Twitter really, if you've got an account & post something then anyone who "follows" you can see it.

If I understand the setup correctly, me putting someone in a circle = me "following" them ... right?

And all it takes to be "followed" (or "circled") is for me to be able to find your account through some means - searching, knowing your gmail address, whatever ... right?

Yeah, except generally when you post you are going to limit it to either all your circles, specific circles or a specific person. If you do that people who are not specified are not going to be reading it, no matter if you are in their circle or not. But if you make a post public, then everyone will be able to read it regardless of circle membership.

So basically, circles accomplish 2 things. It's how you narrow down who you want to read your posts and it's also provides the follow functionality you describe. And you can filter your feed(the one that contains other peoples posts) by specific circles if you don't want to see everything.

[BrianD]

But my putting someone in a circle doesn't do anything to/for the other person. They get a note that I am "following" them, but they can't see anything I do unless they put me in a circle too.

It sounds like we get an in-between of Twitter and Facebook (which could be good or bad). Sex offender puts me in their circle, and people can see that he/she has me in the circle. What they can't see is that I have none of my posts going into the "global" circle and thus am basically silent to this person. Really, what this does is allow me to hide my tweets from the world outside of my defined circles.

[Rizon]

...

[BrianD]

Oh, wait. The setting is to show people who have added you to their circles. If we set this to off, nobody can see that the bad guy added me to their circle. This should solve the problem of people assuming a connection. Bad guy adds me to a circle. I don't allow posts to go public. Bad guy sees me as silent. People looking at my profile don't see bad guy (or anyone else) as having me in their circles.

[cuervo72]

But people looking at bad guy's profile can see me?

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

But people looking at bad guy's profile can see me?

Just looked at a random friend of mine, and I can see who has him in circles.

Poking through settings, I found a way to remove visibility for this:
Privacy
Edit Network Visibility
Remove check in box under "Have you in circles"/"show people who have added you to circles"

I believe that allows hookers to follow their respective senators without being seen by wives.

[Rizon]

Or I should say, it allows senators to be followed by their respective hookers without being seen by wives.

[Rizon]

Ah, just re-read it. I'm not sure how to keep yourself from appearing in someone else's circles.

[Rizon]

Originally Posted by Rizon

Ah, just re-read it. I'm not sure how to keep yourself from appearing in someone else's circles.

I'm kind of baffled that you can't do this, though it might be a setting that isn't quite clear.

[Rizon]

Ah, here it is I believe:

Five Steps to Configuring Privacy on Google Plus | Branded Clever

Under #3 in "Limit who can see other people in your circles"