4 ms·
Google tried this. Google+ You setup your circles for various topics. Neat idea. Complete failure. I’ve set up social interactions for major companies. Bas
by treeman79 6y ago
Google tried this. Google+
You setup your circles for various topics.
Neat idea. Complete failure.
I’ve set up social interactions for major companies. Basically any restriction on who can see what will kill the feature.
- munificent 6y ago> Basically any restriction on who can see what will kill the feature. I think that's likely true for social media apps where the product is "free" in that users are the product and advertisers are the customers that fund it. In that business model, your number one goal is to maximize eyeballs. But Haven doesn't have that business model at all, so it's not clear to me that a way to control who sees what posts would harm success. By analogy, farmers want to grow as many plants per acre as they possibly can to maximize revenue. The idea of potting their plants individually makes no sense. But if I just want a plant on my windowsill and don't want dirt everywhere, a pot is what I want.
- treeman79 6y agoTangent. Any talk of tech people and farmers seems to always change to pot.
- frakkingcylons 6y agoUhhh read that sentence again. I think you’re projecting.
- InitialLastName 6y agoThey were just being self-fulfilling.
- 1234letshaveatw 6y agoIt seems to work well enough in nextdoor interestingly- but the circles are location based
- gowld 6y agoYou cant choose your circles in nextdoor
- samstave 6y agonextdoor pissed me off - when I moved, they sent out a postcard to people I knew telling them of my new address - and I didn't ask them or authorize them to inform people of where I moved - as there were people whom I did not want to know where I lived. That seriously pissed me off.
- Judgmentality 6y agoIANAL but isn't that doxxing? That definitely sounds illegal, and I would seriously consider consulting an attorney.
- pessimizer 6y agoDoxxing isn't a crime. It's a terms of service violation.
- Judgmentality 6y agoI looked into it a bit more (again, IANAL). Doxxing is a crime, but it varies from state to state and intent (so some aspect of malfeasance) seems to be relevant. There's even a proposal to make it a felony in Michigan. https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/doxxing-that-causes-harm-becomes-10-year-felony-under-michigan-house-bill https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/doxxing-that-cau...
- gowld 6y agoFacebook has the same thing so that's not the deciding factor.
- 3np 6y agoI do not think this is the reason Google+ failed miserably. It’s been rehashed enough that I won’t list my top picks :)
- samstave 6y agoFor me, google+ added zero value to my life, thus I dropped it post-haste
- ufmace 6y agoIt was only a failure at what Google wanted it for - displacing Facebook as the dominant social media company. IMO, they failed primarily due to network effects, as in they can't bootstrap without some killer feature to get people to switch over from Facebook. Circles probably didn't help here, since the ultimate effect is to reduce engagement, when they need to maximize it to have a chance of displacing Facebook. Probably the big risk for this thing is that nobody wants to keep track of separate websites for dozens of individuals, most of whom only post something they can see once a week at most. You need to aggregate all of those updates from dozens of people you know into a single website and build a feed, then you have something that probably always has something the user might find interesting, and all in one place, so they'll actually check it regularly.
- rrauenza 6y agoFacebook actually has this as well... But hardly anyone uses it?
- cutemonster 6y agoAll the time with G+ but never with FB. At FB it's not easy to find the feature, but was simple with G+
- hmsimha 6y agoI don't believe Google+ let you self-host, or fully control your data, which seems to be the primary value proposition here. Google+ also wasn't open source, so for example, you couldn't see that deleted posts were actually deleted on the server (they likely weren't)
- OkGoDoIt 6y agoFacebook also had it long before Google+, called friend lists. The UI was not great but it was incredibly useful and I’m super frustrated they have been phasing it out over the years. There are some things I want my super liberal theater friends in San Francisco to see, and some things that are only appropriate for my conservative family and friends from back home in Georgia to see. Some things are appropriate for professional contacts and some things are only appropriate for very close friends who understand my sense of humor. Facebook used to handle all these scenarios beautifully but not so much these days, and as a result I only share things that I’m comfortable everyone seeing, which is a very small percentage of what I might otherwise share.
- iainmerrick 6y agoI think the answer to this is to keep the circles, but don’t make people curate the members of each circle. Instead, have a system where you can categorize your posts and other people can explicitly opt-in or opt-out to following particular categories. That way, you can do a series of detailed posts on Orson Welles (say) for interested parties without worrying about whether you’ll bore or scare off the rest of your friends.