Facebook and Walled Gardens

[Dave2002]

Am I alone in disliking Facebook (I don't have a page, nor do I use it) and the way it has tried (and often succeeded) to set up walled gardens?

Where people create pages which can only be accessed by subscribing to Facebook so far I have always walked away.
At least some people make pages which can be accessed without "forcing" people to subscribe to a service/system they don't want.

It's not only Facebook of course, but that's the one I find I encounter most frequently. I get mad when I'm supposed to log in to something with the assumption that I have a Facebook account. This is insidious. Just like the assumption that I have a mobile phone and will use that to pay for car parking at the local station if the car park machines don't work - which is too often the case.

[I do have a mobile phone - but it's the assumption that "everyone" has one and will use them in certain ways which I dislike.]

[MrGongGong]

I don't think it's a problem with Facebook.
It's very clear that it is a data collection organisation, if you want to use it that's the gig.
I never used to use it at all until I did a project with a group of people who only communicated via Facebook, so somewhat reluctantly I started.
I do find it very useful and actually like the fact that I can control who reads what I put there.

[Pulcinella]

The walled garden at Beningbrough Hall is particularly splendid right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if the friends I went with on Sunday posted some pictures on their Facebook account.

[BBMmk2]

I lover Facebook. I have reconnected with quite a few friends of mine, which both parties are well pleased.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I find Facebook useful too. The BBC Radio 3 Facebook page is rather sickening though - best avoided.

[Dave2002]

Where is Frances when one wants support?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who dislikes this stuff - Twitter, LinkedIn, all the social stuff which we are supposed to be mandated to need/use/require these days.

We can I suppose blame it all on the users - but I don't think that's totally fair. Too many people have jumped on the social networks bandwagons - though we mustn't forget that even this msg board is also part of social networking.

[Serial_Apologist]

Well I am a subscriber, and have to say I enjoy messages from the jazz musicians I know, and reading their links to others that they know. But beyond "liking" and "sharing" when I am in sympathy with messages and links, I rarely find I myself have anything to post on it.

[BBMmk2]

Where is Frances when one wants support?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who dislikes this stuff - Twitter, LinkedIn, all the social stuff which we are supposed to be mandated to need/use/require these days.

We can I suppose blame it all on the users - but I don't think that's totally fair. Too many people have jumped on the social networks bandwagons - though we mustn't forget that even this msg board is also part of social networking.

If you don't like something, don't use it!

[oddoneout]

Where is Frances when one wants support?

I'm sure I'm not the only one who dislikes this stuff - Twitter, LinkedIn, all the social stuff which we are supposed to be mandated to need/use/require these days.

We can I suppose blame it all on the users - but I don't think that's totally fair. Too many people have jumped on the social networks bandwagons - though we mustn't forget that even this msg board is also part of social networking.

You are not alone. I am not a twitbook user either. I find that keeping up with my emails, using this and another forum and also a digital newspaper subscription(which comes courtesy of my son who works there) is more than enough time spent communing with a machine. I don't have 'devices' so have no means(or desire frankly) to 'stay in touch' this way on the move.
The assumption that 'everyone' is part of this does backfire sometimes if the only way of getting information about a venue, organisation, or a business one might want to order from, is via Facebook. Sometimes it is possible to peer round the nagging box telling you to sign in but not always and sometimes I find myself timed out altogether if I keep hitting the 'not now' button.

If you don't like something, don't use it!

As a general principle I agree with you bbm, but to be given no alternative way of communicating doesn't just affect me, as noted above.

[french frank]

[I do have a mobile phone - but it's the assumption that "everyone" has one and will use them in certain ways which I dislike.]

This can be annoying. I possess a small Nokia but I can never get a signal so even if I did tell people my number I wouldn't be able to receive a call or text message.

I had to email my old university and say they'd probably understand that the mobile number given online was fictitious, but unless I filled in a number the online form refused to be submitted. I did on that occasion get a thank-you for pointing out that a mobile number was unintentionally set to mandatory (I was probably the only person EVER to report that I didn't have an accessible mobile number). Apple always want to send verification numbers via text message: try sending them an email to explain

Our FoR3 Facebook is open to all, but I won't guarantee you won't get some sort of advert if you have anything to do with it.

[ahinton]

Our FoR3 Facebook is open to all, but I won't guarantee you won't get some sort of advert if you have anything to do with it.

You could always install an ad-blocker.

[jean]

There was a time when we thought of email like that - but as someone who's been responsible in the past for sending out information to mailing lists, I can tell you it's a godsend.

And people tell us that they really do find out about our concerts through Facebook, so I'm happy about that too.

[Dave2002]

If you don't like something, don't use it!

That's not quite the point. I think Facebook has become slightly less "greedy" now - or that's my impression, but what I really don't like is really the assumption that we'll all have Facebook accounts when we want to access some service or other. OK - if there's a real reason for a walled garden (i.e. we only want our friends or colleagues to access material) then that's OK - but if there's some service whcih many might want to use, then a "requirement" to have a Facebook account doesn't do it for me. IIRC Spotify once tried to make its registration dependent on Facebook, but many people objected, so they reverted to allowing more conventional registration as well. I don't mind if some people want to use Facebook (or other services ...) as a convenience, but I don't think the rest of us should have to follow suit in order to get things done.

I don't use Facebook and I'm probably unlikely to do so in the near future.

[Dave2002]

This can be annoying. I possess a small Nokia but I can never get a signal so even if I did tell people my number I wouldn't be able to receive a call or text message.

I had to email my old university and say they'd probably understand that the mobile number given online was fictitious, but unless I filled in a number the online form refused to be submitted. I did on that occasion get a thank-you for pointing out that a mobile number was unintentionally set to mandatory (I was probably the only person EVER to report that I didn't have an accessible mobile number). Apple always want to send verification numbers via text message: try sending them an email to explain

Our FoR3 Facebook is open to all, but I won't guarantee you won't get some sort of advert if you have anything to do with it.

Ah - so I'm not the only one who puts random numbers in "mandatory" fields in web pages. I have been known to have my date of birth as something around 17th March 1901 - just out of devilment. Possibly some people have had phone calls as a result of my form filling, though it doesn't seem terribly likely.

It's amusing that some technology companies can't cope with email.

You also describe the same situation that we have. Even if we do provide a mobile phone number, our home is in a black hole re reception, so pointless, and there is no guarantee that two factor identification or any such thing which relies on mobile phones is going to work. Sometimes text messages get through, but not phone calls - though since we often (normally!) have our mobile phones turned off, that's equally useless.

[oddoneout]

I find my mobile is a useful 'deflector' as well. It's only used for sending and receiving texts(and that pretty infrequently - I think I've spent less than £2 so far this year) , and as the voicemail is permanently disabled the potential for unwanted messages is reduced, so using it when a phone number has to be supplied for a form saves a lot of irritation. Leaving it turned off is a pretty good filter too!