5 ms·

I have a hard time seeing how one can justify avoiding providing something that users of a service are desperately eager for, ... How do people know what g+ us

I have a hard time seeing how one can justify avoiding providing something that users of a service are desperately eager for, ... How do people know what g+ users are "desperately eager for"? Have there been studies? Polls?

tobyjsullivan 15y ago
I'll bet Google's done the studies and polls. And I'll bet they are seriously considering the response: "We don't want API-driven auto-junk filling our streams!"
- mindcrime 15y ago
  "We don't want API-driven auto-junk filling our streams!" Nobody does, but - again - we're talking about throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. Not everything posted via API is "junk."
  - jamesbritt 15y ago
    Not everything posted via API is "junk." True, but enough of it is to make it a problem. What could Google do to trap the noise but allow the signal? Rate limiting? Pattern matching against Twitter posts?
mindcrime 15y ago
OK, I don't mean to say that every G+ user wants this, mind you. But that a substantial number do is pretty obvious by the posts to the ticket about this, and observing how people interact with other, similar social networks. Does anybody really think that people wouldn't like to be able to use TweetDeck (or whatever) with G+? Or programatically interface with G+ from their blog, or whatever? I may ultimately be proven wrong, but I'd be shocked it a proper study did not show strong demand for a write API.