Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook To Eliminate Voting On Privacy Changes

timothy posted about a year ago | from the three-sheep-and-a-wolf dept.

Facebook 52

Orome1 writes "Facebook has announced some proposed updates to their Data Use Policy (how user data is collected and used) and their Statement of Rights and Responsibilities (explains the terms governing use of their services). These updates include new tools for managing Facebook Messages, changes to how they refer to certain products, tips on managing one's timelines, and reminders about what's visible to other people on Facebook. Elliot Schrage, Facebook's vice president of communications, public policy, and marketing, said: 'We found that the voting mechanism, which is triggered by a specific number of comments, actually resulted in a system that incentivized the quantity of comments over their quality,' he explained. 'Therefore, we're proposing to end the voting component of the process in favor of a system that leads to more meaningful feedback and engagement.'"

cancel ×

52 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Meangingful feedback & engagement? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42066869)

Therefore, we're proposing to end the voting component of the process in favor of a system that leads to more meaningful feedback and engagement.'
It's called turn off the computer, go outside, and act like a human being for once in your god damn life.

My captcha is Uncouth.

Re:Meangingful feedback & engagement? (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#42066955)

It's called turn off the computer, go outside, and act like a human being for once in your god damn life.

This is Slashdot, not Livestrong ... we don't go outside.

Re:Meangingful feedback & engagement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067173)

What is the meaning of this: "Lost at C:>. Found at C."

Re:Meangingful feedback & engagement? (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#42067491)

You'd know this if you didn't go outside.

Re:Meangingful feedback & engagement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067543)

It means you should install Linux.

Re:Meangingful feedback & engagement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42076771)

I use Linux but it isn't obvious to me. Found at C? What, C shell?

More meaningful feedback. (1)

hawks5999 (588198) | about a year ago | (#42066893)

Translation: whatever the various government surveillance agencies tell us to do.

Re:More meaningful feedback. (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#42066919)

Translation: whatever the various government surveillance agencies tell us to do.

Well, it will end up being whatever they want to do, with some inputs from governments to be sure they're handing over our information.

Re:More meaningful feedback. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42066965)

some inputs from governments to be sure they're handing over our information.

Well nothing to worry about they can only hand over that information if you gave it to them... ..oh.. You didn't do that right?

suckers.

Re:More meaningful feedback. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067905)

Nobody's forcing us to use Facebook.

Blowing a Baboon (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42066901)

OO! Hoooooo! HunnngaoogaboogaAAAAAAAA! That's what it sounds like when you blow a baboon.

Re:Blowing a Baboon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067869)

I'm disturbed by the fact that you know this.

Oh god, Gawker/Kinja all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42066903)

Anybody who reads Gawker or sibling websites will know that they changed over to a system called "Kinja" and removed voting for the same reasons. The system was awful on release and only tolerable now and definitely not an improvement. Instead of having a meaningful thread that goes down the page you end up with conversations with 1 other person that nobody else will ever see unless they randomly stumble across your post by clicking multiple times.

Re:Oh god, Gawker/Kinja all over again (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42066971)

Nobody with any respect reads Gawker. Just sayin'

Democracy is doomed... (3, Funny)

lucm (889690) | about a year ago | (#42066977)

How can a crowd make a good decision: half of the voters are more stupid than the average.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067053)

How can a crowd make a good decision: half of the voters are more stupid than the average.

Tell us more, Dear Leader.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (1)

lucm (889690) | about a year ago | (#42067125)

How can a crowd make a good decision: half of the voters are more stupid than the average.

Tell us more, Dear Leader.

I guess only people in the other half can tell that it was a joke, making it a self-fulfilling humorous prophecy.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (3, Funny)

chromas (1085949) | about a year ago | (#42068473)

  • 1: Make joke
  • 2: ?
  • 3: Prophet!

Calling a spade a trowel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067227)

This is about social-networking within a captive audience. Anyone with an activate brain understood it was only a feel-good measure. Facebukake never had the slightest intention of considering these 'votes' unless they happened to align well with the interests of the corporation.

And your observation about the electorate within the U.S. is trivial... everyone who believes their vote doesn't count self-selects out of the process which is surface level participation at best, anyway. If you are interested in government, you're involved at a deeper level, not just sitting on the sidelines voting for people on the basis of dubious information.

Give thanks that you don't live in a secular nation where everyone is encouraged to surveil their neighbor and the police have the power to investigate you at will, without oversight of the courts. A nation where military power is used across the planet, in your name, without your understanding or consent. One wherein propaganda is a mission within agencies that are only accountable to whomever holds office.

Oh, wait...

Thank God, for a second there I thought I was having a flashback to the '50's.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (2)

rmstar (114746) | about a year ago | (#42067345)

How can a crowd make a good decision: half of the voters are more stupid than the average.

Sorry to sabotage your joke, but that would be the median. If you have ten users, all of about the same moderate level of intelligence, and one really dumb, then 90% are above average.

This being facebook, of course, 90% is below average.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (1)

lucm (889690) | about a year ago | (#42069485)

How can a crowd make a good decision: half of the voters are more stupid than the average.

Sorry to sabotage your joke, but that would be the median. If you have ten users, all of about the same moderate level of intelligence, and one really dumb, then 90% are above average.

This being facebook, of course, 90% is below average.

I was under the impression that the IQ of a large population is roughly calculated according to a normal distribution (basically a bell curve with a mean of 100), in which case half of the people are indeed below average, which is why a lot of IQ test results are given as a percentile rather than an arbitrary value. If the metric was wealth, height or any other value that is not relative to the group than your interpretation would be correct.

Now if anybody that subscribes to the efficient market hypothesis reads this they might disagree about wealth being a good example of a metric that is not relative to the group, and people with a strong background in evolutionary biology might disagree about the height example as well, but hopefully you get the idea.

Please don't take my interpretation for granted as I was usually involved in non-acamedic activities during stats lessons in college but how could I know then that I would need that knowledge now, it was not mentioned in the brochure.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | about 2 years ago | (#42073269)

IQ does not measure intelligence.

Re:Democracy is doomed... (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | about 2 years ago | (#42072027)

Sorry to sabotage your sabotage of the joke, but average is not synonymous with mean. The average can be any measure of central tendency. As it is not clear the the mean of stupidity makes sense, but stupidity can be ordered, "average stupidity" would probably be "median stupidity" (or it could be the mode, if several people can be equally stupid).

Re:Democracy is doomed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42069283)

You mean (pun intended) median?

They didn't like the results ... (5, Insightful)

Dark$ide (732508) | about a year ago | (#42066981)

... so they cancelled the poll.

I didn't like their privacy system so I cancelled my FB account.

Re:They didn't like the results ... (1)

telchine (719345) | about a year ago | (#42067097)

... so they cancelled the poll.

I didn't like their privacy system so I cancelled my FB account.

You won't be getting an invite to my party then

Re:They didn't like the results ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067405)

I don't give a fuck about your sorry-ass party. I got bitches to fuck. I get so much punany that my mattress is soaked with the juices of 24 women and counting. I get so much punany that i gotta make my bed everyday so my company doesn't see the white nanny-goo stains all over my bedsheet.

Your party will be just a bunch of zit-encrusted fat guys circle-jerking it to star wars and 6502 assembly language. Well, I tell you what, man -- you keep clack-clack-clackin' away at your keyboards while I'm tap-tap-tappin' those asses. And you know what? Some of them don't even like condoms. Yeah, that's right -- they tell me to take the condoms off before sex. I don't even have to cut a hole out the the tip. Oh and I just passed my latest round of STD tests so all the women I'm tappin' are clean. Dude, I tap, then I tap another the next day -- sometimes even two women a day.

So yeah, your party sucks if you're advertising it on Facebook. See, awesome dudes like me play in this space called real life, and get laid on the second or third date, but often the first as well. And women love me because I'm edgy as fuck. Not you, though. You're not edgy. You're probably beating your dick to the robot-chick [retrojunk.com] from The Guardian Legend.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Re:They didn't like the results ... (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#42067529)

Happy Thanksgiving, Cooldude. [encyclopediadramatica.se]

Re:They didn't like the results ... (2)

Mitreya (579078) | about a year ago | (#42067185)

They didn't like the results ... ... so they cancelled the poll.

But they didn't have to do anything (polling is not done by an independent agency), so why worry about poll results? More likely they found that poll participation resulted in better user awareness of just how bad FB privacy policy is.

Funny how every change FB makes is for improving user feedback and privacy. Even two opposite changes manage qualify as an improvement in their PR speak.

Did they even care before? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067197)

Did they care what people thought about privacy before? I mean we're talking about a company that wont even let you delete your account or photos. A company that admitted to hiring PR firms to smear their competitors about privacy (so FB wouldn't look as bad in comparison).

Anyways, did they ever even pay attention to what users said or voted?

Re:They didn't like the results ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067787)

Yeah, this article just reminded me to finally delete my own account. I really don't use it enough to justify having that info out there. Mind you, if I DID make a lot of use of it I might not mind. But I don't.

To steal someone else's words, if Facebook is the only connection I have to someone then it's probably not someone I care much for anyway.

Voting? (3, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | about a year ago | (#42067009)

So the only people that should be allowed to "vote" are people that can contribute "quality" comments? Are they saying that having a large number of people vote is a bad thing, and they would prefer that fewer people vote but have a larger say because their comments are higher "quality"?

You know, if FB had a dislike button to go along with the like button, then they would have an *actual* mechanism that could be used for voting.

Re:Voting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067027)

I seem to remember that they put the voting system in place due to some government scrutiny of their previous "oops, we made all your stuff you marked private public again" things they used to do every 3 months. I guess that agreement is no longer in force? Anyway, as far as the comments they are probably saying that they had every bit as much value as YouTube comments - which is to say, none at all.

Re:Voting? (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about a year ago | (#42067059)

> if FB had a dislike button to go along with the like button, then they would have an *actual* mechanism that could be used for voting.

Exactly. Pretending or ignoring a completely contrary perspective doesn't make it go away! Sometimes the "other guy" has something interesting / insightful to say. Don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the message.

FaceBook is like a little immature child "Nah, Nah, Nah, I can't hear you!"

Guess what, I can't hear you FaceBook until you grow the fuck up and learn to treat people (and their data) with respect.

Re:Voting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067291)

Guess what, I can't hear you FaceBook until you grow the fuck up and learn to treat people (and their data) with respect.

I'm sure they're losing sleep over this.

Re:Voting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067891)

God I can only imagine what anon would do with a dislike button....

WE COULD FINALLY GET RID OF DUCKFACE PHOTOS O_O

Voting (2)

guttentag (313541) | about a year ago | (#42067029)

Stands on soap box
I vote we keep the voting system! What do you mean I can't vote on it?

Voting and Timeline (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42067075)

If Facebook actually used the "voting" data they did get, they wouldn't have forced people to that timeline crap. In the end what they are saying is, we didn't care what you thought then, and we still don't.

Facebook (2)

faustoc4 (2766155) | about a year ago | (#42067205)

First they get rid of your privacy, then they get rid of voting on privacy, what's next?

What? (1)

gtirloni (1531285) | about a year ago | (#42067289)

I've no idea what they are talking about. Must be because I deleted by FB a while ago.

Re:What? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42068339)

wow, you're such a unique snowflake. Shut the fuck up already.

facebook privacy is such a joke (1)

wwwrench (464274) | about a year ago | (#42067307)

Okay, this is perhaps stating the obvious, but recently, facebook seems to be making such a bewildering set of changes which trample your privacy, that it's impossible to keep track of what's going on. Take FB messages -- without any notification that I was aware of, it started telling people whether I'd read their messages or not. Then it stopped doing this (as far as I can tell), but kept doing it for group messages. Then it started telling me where people were located when they were messaging me. Incredible!

Yet another Facebook hater... (0)

hyades1 (1149581) | about a year ago | (#42067333)

I actually need Facebook for scheduling events and informing people in several FB groups about them. It's great for that. And a lot of the people in those groups are just happy enough with it that they'd need a really good reason to change. So to an extent, I'm stuck. However, I have certainly felt no obligation to be truthful with Facebook about my age or any other "facts" in my profile. My friends know what's real and what isn't. Nobody else needs to know.

Facebook has been so dickish toward its users that I can't help but think it's just one good alternative away from oblivion. Google Plus wasn't it. Diaspora was stillborn. Alternatives like Orkut and Friendster have never really caught on in North America, but have been moderately successful elsewhere.

So like millions of perpetually-annoyed Facebook users, I'm just waiting for that one great alternative that I can move to along enough contacts to lever the rest over as well. When it comes along, Facebook can kiss my rosy ass.

Re:Yet another Facebook hater... (1)

geek (5680) | about a year ago | (#42068121)

Why is Google+ not it? I use it, all it needs is people to move. That is a problem every site will face with the masses too ignorant and/or lazy to leave Facebook. The only thing Google+ is missing is the ability to post on other peoples walls but putting a + before their name on your own wall accomplishes the same thing.

Google+ is amazing but for whatever reason, people just refuse to leave Facebook because they don't give a rats ass about their privacy. Hell most people don't even grasp what privacy is and are happy to post all their drunken frat pics to the public for future employers to see.

If you want people to get over to something like Google+ then you need to do it yourself also. You can't sit on your ass and wait for other people to start using it. Be vocal, post on Facebook publicly the problems with it, and show them the options.

Re:Yet another Facebook hater... (1)

lord_rob the only on (859100) | about 2 years ago | (#42072331)

C'mon if G+ had more users do you really believe they wouldn't behave this way ?

Re:Yet another Facebook hater... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42073491)

C'mon if G+ had more users do you really believe they wouldn't behave this way ?

Raging Android fanboys can*.

Everyone else is quite aware that Google's all about Zuckerberg-level destruction of privacy on the Interwebs.

(* I submit to you ACwin's law: As a discussion on Slashdot involving either Google or Apple grows longer, the probability of it suddenly devolving into smarmy insults about what phones people use approaches 1.)

Re:Yet another Facebook hater... (1)

lord_rob the only on (859100) | about 2 years ago | (#42073713)

That's exactly what I said dear AC, even if I'm an Android fanboy. I know what Google is.
I said: If G+ was bigger, it would be a "Facebook 2.0". What I like in Google is that they often release source code to allow people create their community versions of Android, rooting is explained in the manual, (i.e. you don't have to wait for a hacker to decrypt the security of the mobile phone you're supposed to OWN and not to license).
Google often contributes in Linux kernel, of course it's for their own interest, but they could also keep their work for themselves.

Re:Yet another Facebook hater... (1)

hyades1 (1149581) | about 2 years ago | (#42193927)

I've got a Google+ account, and I use it with my more geekish friends. It hasn't caught on in the wider community I deal with, though, in spite of my efforts.

My life would be a lot easier if I could move a total of about 3,000 people over to Google+ and get them to spend the minimal amount of time it takes to get comfortable with it. As far as I'm concerned, the interface beats the crap out of Facebook, and the communications tools are superior.

FTFY (1)

MrWeelson (948337) | about a year ago | (#42067507)

>>Therefore, we're proposing to end the voting component of the process in favor of a system that leads to more meaningful feedback and engagement.'

Therefore, we're proposing to end the voting component of the process in favour of a system that leads to us being able to get more cash

Voting? what voting? (1)

franciscohs (1003004) | about a year ago | (#42068411)

I honestly have no idea what they are talking about. I admit I'm not a big Facebook user, but I enter some times a week and never saw such voting.

Can someone clarify?, is this a US only thing?

Meh (1)

jonr (1130) | about a year ago | (#42069545)

Care-o-meter: barely moving.

I'll just keep on using adblock, such a first world anarchist...

Non-Issue (1)

theswimmingbird (1746180) | about 2 years ago | (#42071109)

I know we all love ragging on facebook for its anti-user and anti-privacy practices, myself included, but the entire idea behind social networks was sharing things with people. If you don't want something on the internet, don't put it there.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?