Thoughts on Google+
Jul. 24th, 2011 08:24 amHello LJ my old friend . . .
This is probably the longest gap I have ever had in posting to LJ.
Work is crazy-busy, life is the same and Pennsic's getting closer.
As I have noted before, my posting here has dropped off, directly related to life and facebook, and now I am playing with Google+ too.
I am also fascinating watching it from a news reporter/consumer's point of view.
There are links to a number of articles like this floating around out there.
I wonder if there are folks out there who agree with my opinion on this.
I am seeing a number of the technorati gnashing teeth about Google+'s supposed heavy-handedness in suspending accounts either because names don't seem to be real or because people are using pseudonyms.
First off, Rule No. 1 is "Don't be a dick." If Google, individually or collectively is being a dick, that's one thing. I would be really surprised if the majority of what's happening involved "being a dick."
My other thought is that when you have millions of accounts, shit's gonna happen.
But my main thought is this: When you pay for it, you get to complain. It's a free fricking service, just like facebook.
I get to complain on LJ and flickr, etc., because I am a paying member.
Yes, I know these services are becoming vital for people, but if there is no dickishness going on, then follow their rules.
It seems to me -- and if you're in the SCA and on the EK List you know what I mean -- that there are people who choose or become the cognoscenti, then feel they need to "get out their message" all the time. (Yes, I can be "That Guy" sometimes.)
I think the vast majority of people do not care about the nuances.
I especially think that is the case here.
Thoughts?
This is probably the longest gap I have ever had in posting to LJ.
Work is crazy-busy, life is the same and Pennsic's getting closer.
As I have noted before, my posting here has dropped off, directly related to life and facebook, and now I am playing with Google+ too.
I am also fascinating watching it from a news reporter/consumer's point of view.
There are links to a number of articles like this floating around out there.
I wonder if there are folks out there who agree with my opinion on this.
I am seeing a number of the technorati gnashing teeth about Google+'s supposed heavy-handedness in suspending accounts either because names don't seem to be real or because people are using pseudonyms.
First off, Rule No. 1 is "Don't be a dick." If Google, individually or collectively is being a dick, that's one thing. I would be really surprised if the majority of what's happening involved "being a dick."
My other thought is that when you have millions of accounts, shit's gonna happen.
But my main thought is this: When you pay for it, you get to complain. It's a free fricking service, just like facebook.
I get to complain on LJ and flickr, etc., because I am a paying member.
Yes, I know these services are becoming vital for people, but if there is no dickishness going on, then follow their rules.
It seems to me -- and if you're in the SCA and on the EK List you know what I mean -- that there are people who choose or become the cognoscenti, then feel they need to "get out their message" all the time. (Yes, I can be "That Guy" sometimes.)
I think the vast majority of people do not care about the nuances.
I especially think that is the case here.
Thoughts?