91–100 of 117 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Circle management is optional. If you want to use it like Twitter, you can. Just dump everyone in one Circle and spray your content indiscriminately to everyone in it.
> Just dump everyone in one Circle To me, this is shit work (that the author was talking about).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you trying to accomplish by following projects on github? Maybe they can make activity on projects more meaningful, like show you more activity if you're a committer or only big commits if the project is very active but you don't often click on activity items.
That's the point: it's very difficult to automatically determine what someone wants when they follow a project. Sometimes I only want to bookmark it because I know I'll find it useful in the future. Other times, I only care when a new stable version of it is released, with a changelog. When I'm a participant I want to see more details, like new issues or commits. Instead, because of the lack of options, we're left wi…
Motivation is a big factor as well. G+ the motivation is vague, what benefit do you really gain? I know a bunch of people that jumped on Facebook's lists bc of privacy concerns and desire to limit dissemination of their content to unwanted people. For them their privacy >> a base amount of "shit work"... so author not quite right
I disagree. I like being able to set filters and granularity. I like having the option to give me the information I want, in the way I want it. I'm prepared to do the extra up-front setup to get the better end experience; I have hundreds of filters set up on my email, for example.
Don't give me forced simplicity; give me the option to tune it to my needs and give it the power to make it actually useful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Optional? I don't think so. Google Circle _is_ the main feature. That's everything Google+ is about.
Circle management is optional. If you want to use it like Twitter, you can. Just dump everyone in one Circle and spray your content indiscriminately to everyone in it.
Yes it's an optional feature and people can not use it but frankly the whole product is optional and people can not use it.
If you're going to put a feature in your product then you should do so in a way that makes it as good as it can possibly be - and that includes reducing the associated shit work.
But, but... I like putting my friends into Venn diagrams. Seriously. The 1 click it takes to put someone is a circle isn't really "work", and if it saves me awkward calls from my mom because she read a post intended for my drinking buddies, then it was well worth it.
If you organize to speed up your "real work" great. If you organize to organize, that's shit work.
I'm not sure what category g+ circles are in though..
He's right in that Facebook was helpful by auto-creating certain "groups" of friends for you based on profile information. Where this completely breaks down is once you move past the trivial task of auto-populating categories for your location, school, and work. As I see it there are three modes of sharing: The first is where my post is quite innocent and generic, so I just want to declare it to the world. This goes…
Reading your three situations, I have another one which I've been thinking about: a post which is informative and in some way beneficial to the public, but which a significant portion of the people you know simply do not care about. For example, you may have an excellent piece of commentary about the history of Unix and the state of X, Y, Z in modern operating system design. Most of your non-technical friends, along…
Two possible solutions:
Channels: You create a few outlets, for example "technical", "personal", "food-i-ate-today". Then I could subscribe to your "technical" channel and ignore the res. Guess this is close to what joebadmo posted.
Tags: Almost the same, but a post can have many tags.
The problems with these "solutions" is: what heppens when you create a new tag/channel? Maybe one should auto-subscribe to all of them, and then ppl could remove those they don't want. Might be shit work though.
joebadmo
Ah, this argument again. Simplicity rules. I disagree. I like being able to set filters and granularity. I like having the option to give me the information I want, in the way I want it. I'm prepared to do the extra up-front setup to get the better end experience; I have hundreds of filters set up on my email, for example. Don't give me forced simplicity; give me the option to tune it to my needs and give it the powe…