3 ms·
I disagree. Facebook has one of the easiest, and certainly cheapest, methods to inform users of new TOS agreements. In contrast to your CC company, they don't
by greyboy 18y ago
I disagree.
Facebook has one of the easiest, and certainly cheapest, methods to inform users of new TOS agreements. In contrast to your CC company, they don't have to physically mail an updated document. If the TOS change, the user can simply be presented the new terms upon logging in (the next login after the change, or course), and they have the opportunity to agree to the new terms or not. This is how some sites have tackled this problem in my own experience.
If they wanted to be really fancy, they could even highlight where the changes are via change bars or text formatting. I wouldn't expect that, however.
- unalone 18y agoI really don't think Facebook thinks their changing their TOS is a big deal. I'm sure they changed it because they had to, and didn't expect anybody to really care. Also, I'd imagine that as an engineer, "Create the most optimal terms-of-service change page" is a bit of a drag. Also also, if Facebook isn't intending to do this maliciously, then if they highlight stuff like the new lines Mashable's jumping on, they'll get a lot of paranoid users for nothing. If they are doing it maliciously, it's in their best interests not to let users see what's happening.
- greyboy 18y agoAgreed, but it's also very easy to have the user agree to the new terms without throwing conspiracy-theorist-red-flags all around the Internets (tm).
- unalone 18y agoIf you're Facebook? You're a closed-off site that doesn't like interacting with other companies, and you're also incredibly popular. There's no way you can do anything without the Internet getting mad at you. I think they figure it's not worth bugging users about it.
- jerf 18y agoIf you think that my post was "conspiracy-theorist-red-flags", you need to read more Terms of Service. That's not a "conspiracy theory", it's a factual description of what clauses Terms of Service typically contain. Go read your credit card TOS. Go read your cell phone TOS. Go read the TOS of your favorite ten websites large enough to have a legal staff. Go read the EULA for your favorite ten pieces of commercial software. I'll wait. You'll find that clause is everywhere. I know this, because I have read them. Not to mention I then go on to talk about why they have legitimate reasons to exist and shouldn't be considered simply as "power grabs"; I explicitly repudiate conspiracy theories, with reasons. What more do you freaking want?
- greyboy 18y agoI'm not at odds with what you or unalone have said. I understand the need for TOS agreements, good or bad as they may be (even though not tested in a court), and the difficulty interfacing with bazillions of users. My specific point was to say that it would be extremely _easy_ for Facebook to have notified it's users of a change. My credit card, mobile phone and utility providers can all seem to do it via snail mail whenever there is a change. Whether they choose to do it for whatever reason is another discussion.
- ja2ke 18y agoHeh, creating a more optimal TOS page being "a drag" is a fairly hilarious hypothetical excuse.
- unalone 18y agoLook, if I'm working at Facebook, I'll be ticked off if my week's work is "make a terms of service page." And if I'm Zuckerberg, I'll be ticked off if I'm paying somebody to do that.