A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24 • Hacker News Board

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#101

Post by antr » Sat, Mar 29, 2014, 8:20 PM UTC

prostoalex wrote: post #84

antr wrote: post #2

Every day that goes by I am more convinced that the Twitter stream is the best way to communicate, as a brand and as a consumer. On Twitter, as in Facebook, I follow/like whatever brands I find interesting, engaging and resonate with my believes/interests. If I see that a brand does/say something I don't like, I simply unfollow/unlike. What Facebook is doing is (over)engineering how my relationship with brands/people…

If you bookmark https://www.facebook.com/?sk=h_chr for your starter page, the News Feed will go into "Recent Stories" mode, featuring everybody in reverse chronological order, equivalent of Twitter's feed.

great tip – many thanks

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#102

Post by trevelyan » Sat, Mar 29, 2014, 9:45 PM UTC

evgen wrote: post #64

sergiotapia wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no. I disagree with what you're saying. If I create a page for my business and share coupons and stuff, people are free to come like my page. That means they want to see more of my stuff voluntarily. Why is Facebook extorting money from the business to allow users to see what they want to see?

No, it does my mean they want to see a constant stream of every promotion and sale you offer. It means that they liked _one thing_ and your page is no different than the thousand other things I have liked last month. You don't have some entitlement to space on my feed. If I am interested then a constant stream of likes to your content will keep you in view. If you convinced me and ten thousand others to like a single…

The problem with Facebook's behavior is not that their changes insulate you from spam so much that they may encourage it: the new equilibrium for spammers being not to publish less so much as to ramp up publication and reach the same number of people through volume. Meanwhile, smaller publishers who create limited volumes of good content are less likely to bother at all.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#103

Post by ryandrake » Sun, Mar 30, 2014, 3:35 PM UTC

nknighthb wrote: post #42

ryandrake wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand the difference between " ads" and " 's content". Facebook is a promotional platform. Content posted there by companies are advertisements, nearly by definition.

People like/follow accounts of companies on social networks in order to consume the content those accounts post. Certainly this includes marketing material, but a key distinction between this and ordinary ads is that people have made a deliberate decision, "I wish to see content from this company". That content becomes part of the reason people spend time on the platform, adding more opportunities for Facebook to sel…

I think, what you are saying is, "It's not an ad if somebody signed up to see it". It takes a lot of imagination to distinguish between "company content" and "ads" on a platform whose purpose is PR and promotion.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#104

Post by nknighthb » Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 12:07 AM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #103

nknighthb wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like/follow accounts of companies on social networks in order to consume the content those accounts post. Certainly this includes marketing material, but a key distinction between this and ordinary ads is that people have made a deliberate decision, "I wish to see content from this company". That content becomes part of the reason people spend time on the platform, adding more opportunities for Facebook to sel…

I think, what you are saying is, "It's not an ad if somebody signed up to see it". It takes a lot of imagination to distinguish between "company content" and "ads" on a platform whose purpose is PR and promotion.

It takes no imagination to distinguish between "things users go to Facebook to see" and "things users do not go to Facebook to see".

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#105

Post by ryandrake » Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 2:34 AM UTC

nknighthb wrote: post #104

ryandrake wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think, what you are saying is, "It's not an ad if somebody signed up to see it". It takes a lot of imagination to distinguish between "company content" and "ads" on a platform whose purpose is PR and promotion.

It takes no imagination to distinguish between "things users go to Facebook to see" and "things users do not go to Facebook to see".

I agree that people will want to see some ads and they will not want to see other ads. They're all still ads.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#106

Post by evgen » Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 9:56 AM UTC

sergiotapia wrote: post #92

evgen wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it does my mean they want to see a constant stream of every promotion and sale you offer. It means that they liked _one thing_ and your page is no different than the thousand other things I have liked last month. You don't have some entitlement to space on my feed. If I am interested then a constant stream of likes to your content will keep you in view. If you convinced me and ten thousand others to like a single…

You're confused. A like _for_ a page is not the same as a like on a _single post_.

No, you are the one who is confused here. A like for a page, similar to a like on a single post, is not permission to spam my news feed. If I wanted to subscribe to your updates I would actually, you know, subscribe. A like is a coarse-granularity indication that I have some interest in your page, but just like everything else I opted to "like" it is one indicator among many that should be used to build my feed.

Re: A Breakup Letter to Facebook from Eat24

#107

Post by nknighthb » Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 1:38 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #105

nknighthb wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes no imagination to distinguish between "things users go to Facebook to see" and "things users do not go to Facebook to see".

I agree that people will want to see some ads and they will not want to see other ads. They're all still ads.

In your opinion, not in mine. If Facebook agrees with you, then Facebook should be honest and ban commercial entities from having accounts, instead requiring them to use only the ordinary advertising mechanisms.