> How did you miss that? It's largely inconsequential. Google's search has progressed to the point that content farms are easily identified and penalized. I do

> How did you miss that? It's largely inconsequential. Google's search has progressed to the point that content farms are easily identified and penalized. I don't need to opt-in to a special club to bear the benefits of this. And my blog isn't a source of income, so I could frankly care less about who steals what. > The point the author made was that it won't "force you down a path", rather it will lure you with capabilities. But G+ is very clearly trying to force itself on everyone, despite the proclamations of this fellow. And _my_ point was that I'm NOT lured by these capabilities, despite the fact that the author seems to conclude that he's discovered some kind of universal truths with regards to web services. > Anyone who refuses to enhance their capability out of sheer stubborness is someone I will NEVER do business with. You will do what your clients require or go broke maintaining that POV; clients are stubborn by nature, and if you take the "my way or the highway" route then they will indeed take the highway. For the vast majority of us here, we are lucky to have clients -- not the other way around. edit: I wish you people would comment if you're going to downvote. What was so patently offensive about this?