3 ms·

Because the entire premise is wrong > It’s socially awkward to refuse to add someone to your friends list—but removing someone from your friends list is practi

by VMG 14y ago

Because the entire premise is wrong > It’s socially awkward to refuse to add someone to your friends list—but removing someone from your friends list is practically a declaration of war. It really isn't that bad as he makes it out to be. End of discussion.

toyg 14y ago
I think it's more about the fact that the addition is publicised while the removal is silent, combined with EdgeRank hiding most of your fb-friends' activity by default, hence "smoothing" the departure. PersonYouDontCareAbout (PYDCA) adds you, you accept, he enjoys the add, a few days pass, you remove him. Because PYDCA wasn't really paying attention to you (his feed is full of other people's activity, supposedly more relevant to his interests), he doesn't notice. A few months pass, he forgets everything about you. Even if he remembers, he'll just think he never added you in the end. Even if he remembers and knows he's added you, you simply don't bump into each other so much that he might care. What is really, really awkward is when he adds you, you do this dance, and then FB keeps reminding him every day that he should add you. FB should have a button "this guy doesn't care" and stop trying to make me look awkward.
- Supermighty 14y ago
  Just after you silently remove PYDCA you also add them to the block list, and they never see you again.
nathan_long 14y ago
"It really isn't that bad as he makes it out to be. End of discussion." You say that as though you'd definitively disproved the premise, instead of just saying "nuh-uh." Citation?
- reinhardt 14y ago
  In case the question was not tongue-in-cheek, what's the citation for the original premise? I have trouble imagining what would be a citation for "(dis)proving" that something is socially awkward.
- batista 14y ago
  4 years have passed since the article, Facebook haven't been affected much by the situation described therein, much less it has been "killed". Citations are only needed when you cannot directly observe some reality for yourself. Here we can: it was a prediction, it never came off, _thus_ it was wrong. End of story.
- VMG 14y ago
  > You say that as though you'd definitively disproved the premise, instead of just saying "nuh-uh." He raises an hypothesis without any evidence. As Hitchens said: Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
joshuahedlund 14y ago
I agree with the article that it is socially awkward. For now I try to beat this game by not playing - that is, leaving distant acquaintances in a perpetual unanswered request state. I realize Facebook may not let me refuse to play, forever. The same awkwardness applies to unfollowing people you know on Twitter, especially because they could be using a service that lets them know. Except since I have to play that game, I just play it and don't worry about it. Can't say how most others play, though.

by VMG 14y ago

toyg 14y ago

I think it's more about the fact that the addition is publicised while the removal is silent, combined with EdgeRank hiding most of your fb-friends' activity by default, hence "smoothing" the departure. PersonYouDontCareAbout (PYDCA) adds you, you accept, he enjoys the add, a few days pass, you remove him. Because PYDCA wasn't really paying attention to you (his feed is full of other people's activity, supposedly more relevant to his interests), he doesn't notice. A few months pass, he forgets everything about you. Even if he remembers, he'll just think he never added you in the end. Even if he remembers and knows he's added you, you simply don't bump into each other so much that he might care. What is really, really awkward is when he adds you, you do this dance, and then FB keeps reminding him every day that he should add you. FB should have a button "this guy doesn't care" and stop trying to make me look awkward.

Supermighty 14y ago
Just after you silently remove PYDCA you also add them to the block list, and they never see you again.

nathan_long 14y ago

"It really isn't that bad as he makes it out to be. End of discussion." You say that as though you'd definitively disproved the premise, instead of just saying "nuh-uh." Citation?

reinhardt 14y ago
In case the question was not tongue-in-cheek, what's the citation for the original premise? I have trouble imagining what would be a citation for "(dis)proving" that something is socially awkward.
batista 14y ago
4 years have passed since the article, Facebook haven't been affected much by the situation described therein, much less it has been "killed". Citations are only needed when you cannot directly observe some reality for yourself. Here we can: it was a prediction, it never came off, _thus_ it was wrong. End of story.
VMG 14y ago
> You say that as though you'd definitively disproved the premise, instead of just saying "nuh-uh." He raises an hypothesis without any evidence. As Hitchens said: Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

joshuahedlund 14y ago

I agree with the article that it is socially awkward. For now I try to beat this game by not playing - that is, leaving distant acquaintances in a perpetual unanswered request state. I realize Facebook may not let me refuse to play, forever. The same awkwardness applies to unfollowing people you know on Twitter, especially because they could be using a service that lets them know. Except since I have to play that game, I just play it and don't worry about it. Can't say how most others play, though.