5 ms·

>>> When someone creates an event on Facebook they can tick a box saying "anyone can view and RSVP (public event)". <<< Seems to be a classic case of a user bl

>>> When someone creates an event on Facebook they can tick a box saying "anyone can view and RSVP (public event)". <<< Seems to be a classic case of a user blindly clicking anything to continue.

NZ_Matt 16y ago
Exactly. I know people on here enjoy hating on Facebook, but you can't blame them for this.
- saw-lau 16y ago
  Really? I don't know... Surely the fact is that it's way too easy to unwittingly publish anything to the whole world on FB?
  - benjoffe 16y ago
    It's easy to publish things to the entire world online just about everywhere, Facebook has a checkbox right above the button that say 'create event' that takes care of it. Granted it is checked on by default, but it is in no way misleading. If the issue boils down to whether or not Facebook should have that checkbox off by default, then it really is quite ridiculous.
    - Qz 16y ago
      Bad UI design is still their fault.
      - benjoffe 16y ago
        I'm not saying their UI design is any good, simply that it's adequate. Filling out a form that is completely self descriptive and transparent incorrectly, and then blaming is absurd. This is what I see when I create an event: http://www.benjoffe.com/temp/fbevent.png http://www.benjoffe.com/temp/fbevent.png [] Anyone can view and RSVP to this event (public event) They say twice in that sentence what the implications of that field are. Call me old fashioned but I take responsibility for my actions.
        Qz 16y ago
        a) The way I see it is akin to signup pages on websites where the 'option' to allow them to spam you with email is checked by default. Yes it's obvious what the checkmark does and reader beware, but that doesn't make it less underhanded. b) Responsibility is a funny thing -- people seem to think it can only fall on one person. Either it's the girl's fault or it's facebook's fault. In reality the responsibility is on all of us.
- cookiecaper 16y ago
  Why not? They intentionally leave permissive settings that they understand are probably not what the user wants, or at least not really "safe" defaults, because they want more pageviews. They do the same things with profiles -- they retroactively publicize information and everything is accessible by everyone by default because it corresponds to better numbers for Facebook. "If you're not paying for something, you are the product." Now, I agree that people should understand that and be cautious while using Facebook et al, but the fact is that there is quite a bit of naiveté going on out there. People assume Facebook is benevolent, this organization run by a guy who just really cares about friends connecting with each other and wouldn't do anything tricky or bad like set up insecure defaults because it lends to an easier payday. The real question is how we install this necessary skepticism and precaution in users. More Chris Hanson-esque entrapment? That hasn't seemed to work so far...

>>> When someone creates an event on Facebook they can tick a box saying "anyone can view and RSVP (public event)". <<< Seems to be a classic case of a user blindly clicking anything to continue.

NZ_Matt 16y ago

Exactly. I know people on here enjoy hating on Facebook, but you can't blame them for this.

saw-lau 16y ago
Really? I don't know... Surely the fact is that it's way too easy to unwittingly publish anything to the whole world on FB?
- benjoffe 16y ago
  It's easy to publish things to the entire world online just about everywhere, Facebook has a checkbox right above the button that say 'create event' that takes care of it. Granted it is checked on by default, but it is in no way misleading. If the issue boils down to whether or not Facebook should have that checkbox off by default, then it really is quite ridiculous.
  - Qz 16y ago
    Bad UI design is still their fault.
    - benjoffe 16y ago
      I'm not saying their UI design is any good, simply that it's adequate. Filling out a form that is completely self descriptive and transparent incorrectly, and then blaming is absurd. This is what I see when I create an event: http://www.benjoffe.com/temp/fbevent.png http://www.benjoffe.com/temp/fbevent.png [] Anyone can view and RSVP to this event (public event) They say twice in that sentence what the implications of that field are. Call me old fashioned but I take responsibility for my actions.
      - Qz 16y ago
        a) The way I see it is akin to signup pages on websites where the 'option' to allow them to spam you with email is checked by default. Yes it's obvious what the checkmark does and reader beware, but that doesn't make it less underhanded. b) Responsibility is a funny thing -- people seem to think it can only fall on one person. Either it's the girl's fault or it's facebook's fault. In reality the responsibility is on all of us.
cookiecaper 16y ago
Why not? They intentionally leave permissive settings that they understand are probably not what the user wants, or at least not really "safe" defaults, because they want more pageviews. They do the same things with profiles -- they retroactively publicize information and everything is accessible by everyone by default because it corresponds to better numbers for Facebook. "If you're not paying for something, you are the product." Now, I agree that people should understand that and be cautious while using Facebook et al, but the fact is that there is quite a bit of naiveté going on out there. People assume Facebook is benevolent, this organization run by a guy who just really cares about friends connecting with each other and wouldn't do anything tricky or bad like set up insecure defaults because it lends to an easier payday. The real question is how we install this necessary skepticism and precaution in users. More Chris Hanson-esque entrapment? That hasn't seemed to work so far...