5 ms·

The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. On Facebook, you can send a message to anyone from their profile, but it show

The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. On Facebook, you can send a message to anyone from their profile, but it shows up within Facebook rather than the person's e-mail client (and it shows up in 'other' too.) Edit: Facebook did not email me the last time I received something in my Other inbox (but that was a couple of years ago); perhaps that has changed? Edit2: Being able to send a Google+ message from your e-mail client is a nice convenience that takes advantage of the fact that Google owns both properties. (It would be nice if it also provided a lookup for Facebook users.) I think that is all that this is, which means there is no controversy. I imagine you could already write someone a message that shows up in their email without knowing what their email address is by messaging them within Google+. If that is the case, this change is purely an added convenience that doesn't impact spamming at all.

jayd16 13y ago
Except that Facebook will also email you about that unless you opt-out just like Google+.
- chilldream 13y ago
  Facebook didn't staple their social network onto a non-social-network service after the fact, and then demand you sign up for it. Not everyone on Google+ actually wants to be on Google+.
jere 13y ago
>The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. And that prevents what exactly... people sending you email? I don't get it.
- wmf 13y ago
  Some people are really touchy about receiving mail from anyone they don't already know. Based on this thread, quite a few people.
- jerf 13y ago
  Email has a light-weight de facto security system where people can't send you an email without knowing your address. Obviously, this isn't perfect, and it was never truly a security feature, but, nevertheless, it is there, and for all of its manifold and obvious faults, it mostly works this way. People are used to this. Taking it away will bother people.
brownbat 13y ago
> The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. Now they need to know a different piece of pseudo-public information, your G+ username. Isn't this just a lateral shift? I mean, there's still a "report spam" button, right?

jayd16 13y ago

Except that Facebook will also email you about that unless you opt-out just like Google+.

chilldream 13y ago
Facebook didn't staple their social network onto a non-social-network service after the fact, and then demand you sign up for it. Not everyone on Google+ actually wants to be on Google+.

jere 13y ago

>The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. And that prevents what exactly... people sending you email? I don't get it.

wmf 13y ago
Some people are really touchy about receiving mail from anyone they don't already know. Based on this thread, quite a few people.
jerf 13y ago
Email has a light-weight de facto security system where people can't send you an email without knowing your address. Obviously, this isn't perfect, and it was never truly a security feature, but, nevertheless, it is there, and for all of its manifold and obvious faults, it mostly works this way. People are used to this. Taking it away will bother people.

brownbat 13y ago

> The difference is that you don't need to know what the person's email address is. Now they need to know a different piece of pseudo-public information, your G+ username. Isn't this just a lateral shift? I mean, there's still a "report spam" button, right?