3 ms·

OK, I get that DangerousMinds posts a ridiculous amount and would definitely be deleted from my account and probably should have to pay for advertising on an ad

OK, I get that DangerousMinds posts a ridiculous amount and would definitely be deleted from my account and probably should have to pay for advertising on an ad platform, but what about other use cases: I run a nonprofit alumni association here in Boston and I use FB as a way to update alumni of changes in events so that we can limit the numbers of emails we send. We were using Facebook as sort of an information platform and don't profit or make any money in any way. I am very careful to not post too much, even entering in to specific agreements with the national alumni association so that they do not to post ads on our page for their merchandise etc. What am I supposed to do now? Should I pay out of my pocket to reach users who definitely want to be reached already? Facebook provides a great service, and they should be compensated, but I will now have to look at other options to potentially reach our group. --- And the flip side of this is that I would like to see posts from everyone I am friends with that I haven't explicitly blocked from my feed, going through all those names to re-add them seems like an amazing amount of trouble for me. --- The OP is hard to sympathize with, but he/she has a good point.

wgoodwin 14y ago
Agreed, entirely. I realized that I've been using FB as a surrogate for an email newsletter for side web projects. I also realized that many people I know use the feed as a surrogate for RSS to the feeds of their friends' lives. In both cases, FB isn't the answer: it's neither MailChimp nor FeedBurner. I don't begrudge FB trying to monetize their service. It's just that their service isn't what most people seem to be using it for. Thus their paid options will seem like bizarre value propositions to the average user.
rohansingh 14y ago
For something like an association or a team organization, a Facebook group would make a lot more sense. That lets you make sure your messages get to everyone.
- wtvanhest 14y ago
  I hope you have the opportunity to read this and reply (or anyone else that knows more about this). My understanding of groups is that they are more for short term active discussions where as pages are better for long term relationships. Also, I don't think you can add events to pages, where you can for groups. Am I looking at this wrong?

wgoodwin 14y ago

Agreed, entirely. I realized that I've been using FB as a surrogate for an email newsletter for side web projects. I also realized that many people I know use the feed as a surrogate for RSS to the feeds of their friends' lives. In both cases, FB isn't the answer: it's neither MailChimp nor FeedBurner. I don't begrudge FB trying to monetize their service. It's just that their service isn't what most people seem to be using it for. Thus their paid options will seem like bizarre value propositions to the average user.

rohansingh 14y ago

For something like an association or a team organization, a Facebook group would make a lot more sense. That lets you make sure your messages get to everyone.

wtvanhest 14y ago
I hope you have the opportunity to read this and reply (or anyone else that knows more about this). My understanding of groups is that they are more for short term active discussions where as pages are better for long term relationships. Also, I don't think you can add events to pages, where you can for groups. Am I looking at this wrong?