Skip to main content

View Diary: Facebook is Murdering Dogs (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I understand your frustration BUT to put all your (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrugalGranny, Calamity Jean

    eggs into the Facebook akin to running an Child Protective Services in the same manner.

     If the lives of the dogs are in jeopardy due to a Facebook breakdown...this is, honestly, the fault of whomever is "protecting" them using and relying on a free social media service....that was never intended to be a dog rescue operation.   If you have any lives in your really should have thought of setting up a network you have complete control over.

     Facebook is not your network, you haven't paid to use it, you are not a customer of theirs,  they have no responsibility to you to provide anything, in any way or in any form. Matter of fact, as popular as it is, if they so choose...they could very well charge for the service and still be up and running as big as they are operating free.

      If they were a "for charge" might, and I mean maybe,  then have a valid point...but even then it's questionable, unless they agreed to take responsibility by guaranteeing you some type of consistency.  However, as it is....they are a free service and you are free to use your own risk.  Period.   You should have never expected Facebook to be your lifeline.  

    What is Facebook had decided to just close down could at anytime....what was plan B at that point???

    •  But facebook didn't close down shop... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... and they aren't experiencing a temporary glitch, or disruption of service.  

      They are intentionally performing a very bizarre and unnecessary experiment in purposely disabling a totally standard functionality that is expected in any forum that has a post and comment format.  They have the right to do this, but it is extremely frivolous.

      They may not have anticipated that people are actually using their services for important functions, but they should have. Facebook may be free, but being free is part of their marketing strategy, and there is a tacit understanding between facebook and its users that the users will take facebook seriously and make use of its features, and in return, facebook will have some degree of reliability.  

      It is not as unreasonable or irresponsible for the dog rescue groups to have made use of facebook's features to organize rescues as a lot of the commenters here are making it out to be.   The groups and pages are very robust, and there isn't really anything else out there that compares when you consider both the features that they offer, and the fact that lots and lots of non-techy people are already part of facebook, and can find their way to these groups relatively organically in a way that would never happen with something like, say "Yahoo Groups" or whatever else it is that you may propose.

      I think you are assuming that there was an existing membership, and then the leadership said "everybody join facebook, so we can communicate there. Let's use their free features."  It was probably the other way around: Many more people, who are already participating in the facebook ecosystem found their way to the dog rescue groups than ever did prior to facebook, and because of that, some incredible team rescues became possible, and now, for no good reason at all, that has been cut off at the knees.

      Why is everybody here giving Gottlieb so much crap?  Why wouldn't you, at worst, just ignore the diary?

      •  that experiment (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        is how facebook operates. every day facebook beta tests an update on a limited number of pages live. on real pages, every day.

        the ones that work, it keeps. some tests last longer than others. some just days, others weeks or months. the ones that don't work, go away.

        every FB update was done live at some point without warning. it's the FB business model of experimentation.

        •  exactly. (0+ / 0-)

          and Gottlieb appears to be simply pointing out that that approach can have disasterous consequences.

          •  no, he's claiming that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            facebook is intentionally targeting animal rights and rescue groups and in the process killing dogs.

            •  I really don't think he is. (0+ / 0-)

              I agree that his diary title is potentially misleading in that way, but I took it to be rhetorical hyperbole from the start.

              He does say that it appears that there is a disproportionate amount of complaints about this issue from rescue groups, but I think he was careful not to settle strongly on the conclusion that they were intentionally targeted.  

              His main complaint appears to be against the deaf ear that facebook is turning towards rescue groups, once they've attempted to bring the problem to Facebook's attention.

            •  Trombone (0+ / 0-)

              I have zero respect for your ability to reason.

              You are perfect corporate shill material. You enjoy hearing yourself argue, but you are a fool.

              •  i would HR you for personal insults (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                but it wouldn't be right for me to do it.

                G - you have the right to voice your opinion. But when others offer you advice on how to adjust, you might want to try NOT insulting them. You kow the old saying, catch more flies with honey

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site