Loading Profile...
Where are Friends in the new StumbleUpon
Has the Friends issue been set in stone? I do not want to keep fighting for a lost cause if it is a done deal. Please just let me know. I will need to tell my friends that do not subscribe to me that I am going to lose them. Some of my Friends and I just share, so that means we would both have to subscribe to each other if I am getting all this correctly. I also PM with several people on a regular basis and want to know about that issue too, please. Are we sill going to have PMs? I see a lot of discussions, but no real definite answers.
I have one more question too. How are people new to SU going to meet people if they cannot PM or contact them? Really, how likely is it that people that have over 1,000 mutual subscribers are going to want to get to know them, or accept more shares? I don't know that they will not want to do so, but it just seems very unlikely to me. I'm sure they will set me straight if this is not the case. :))
I do hope for some answers this time. My "why can't the Friends be optional" is still sitting there unanswered and lonely.
I have one more question too. How are people new to SU going to meet people if they cannot PM or contact them? Really, how likely is it that people that have over 1,000 mutual subscribers are going to want to get to know them, or accept more shares? I don't know that they will not want to do so, but it just seems very unlikely to me. I'm sure they will set me straight if this is not the case. :))
I do hope for some answers this time. My "why can't the Friends be optional" is still sitting there unanswered and lonely.
I’m frustrated
68
people have this question
I have this question, too!
Tell me when someone answers.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The company marked this question as answered.
The best answers from the company
-
"I certainly don't want all my subscribers to inundate me with pages they send !"
The option to share sites with a subscriber is an additional checkbox. If you leave it unchecked, you will subscribe but not be able to share.
Hope this answered your question.
I’m feeling helpful :)
3 people say
this answers the question
-
We will continue to monitor feedback on the new subscription system. At the same time, we will track the metrics very closely to better understand how the system is being used globally on StumbleUpon.
One of the main goals of StumbleUpon is to share your favorite site with people who have similar interests, Because of this "Direct Share" (formally known as mutuals) is an additional option on top of subscriptions. As such, the number of direct shares are limited by the number of subscriptions you have. The 4 types of relationships you can have in the new system (which is actually the old v2 system) are:
* People who are not subscribing to each other
* People you subscribe to
* People who subscribe to you
* Mutual subscribers
Direct share is an additional option available for mutual subscribers. It is not a different type of relationship. This is something we wanted to simplify in the new system. Looking back now, it was a mistake to introduce 2 different types of relationships on StumbleUpon last year. It's like having both the social relationships from Facebook & Twitter on one site. Keeping it simple is one of the main goals of this release :)
Cheers.
I’m confident
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Just a general note to all: this facility - currently under evaluation - should be considered, by our members, as an extension of StumbleUpon's Community and an integral part of our "official Support".
Our StumbleUpon Community and Forum Rules are equally appropriate and applicable here, and would we ask - particularly - that any posts made with regard to a problem report or Feature request "respond to the issues raised, not to the person".
Some of these subjects are emotive, we understand, but we would ask you, please, to help us to maintain this as an effective facility by re-familiarising yourself with our rules and by adhering to them here.
Many thanks.
http://www.stumbleupon.com/aboutus/co...
The company says
this answers the question
The best answers from everyone
-
I actually think of them as web-pals, ie pen-pals but over the internet.
But. that isn't the point.
First SU has taken something firmly established in the minds of it's clients and changed it for no good reason.
second the change of terminology is verbose, - it's a barrier to entry; what is a new user to make of "Mutual Subscribers who can direct share"? Does that sound warm and social to anyone?
third the change encourages mindless sharing.
If I engage someone in FRIENDly manner ( anywhere ) It is implied I do so with due concern for their likes and dislikes - However "Mutual Subscribers who can Direct Share" because it is opaque, and not an intuitive label - suggests Users can just spam you with a page just because *they* like it.
Fourth they've stripped out the Friend Request notification page, so I can't keep track of who is subscribing to me, or ticking the box to allow shares.
( The mod's here seems hell bent on separating out individual facets of SU, and closing more global discussions, this flies in the face of the synergy that makes SU better than rest )
Lastly after doing all this SU tells me V4 is more social! in the face of double-speak like MSWCDS and the Orwellian moderation I feel I am in 1984.
3 people say
this answers the question
-
@Steve- I just got a message from a friend I made,the nite I joined SU.April,2008.My first friend here. She said that she sent me a share,just like she does everyday,but the SU page came up,telling her we were not friends. Now In April,2008,there were no friends,(V3).We could only subscribe to each other,and we became mutual subscribers and dear friends.When friends,came out(V3?),SU just rolled us over,as friends and mutual subscribers. In her message today,she wrote,that when she signed on,it was the new SU,which she had never seen before.She asked if I had unfriended her? Did I know what was going on? At the moment,I'm just as confused as she is. I haven't signed on to SU yet,to see what is going on today.
About a month ago,I posted the question,"How Many People will we be Allowed to Subscribe to?" SU has not answered this question yet. Now for the person,I am talking about,we have never been official friends before. That happened,when SU changed, early this year and rolled us over that way.So now what? All the people we *used*to be mutuals with,we can suddenly,no longer share with? Maybe it's just me,or my account? Today is the first day this has happened to me. Up until now,all of my mutuals have been able to share. Sadly,it looks like we will be losing something,friends,mutuals,whatever you want to call them.I am going to lose at least 200+. Until SU tells us how many we can subscribe to,I can't even change my friend or subscribe lists.
I'm also, another one of the people,with close friends and mutuals,missing off my inbox,contact list. Yes,I already reported that bug too. Still no answer.Yes,this may not sound like a big deal....until it happens to you:((
I’m frustrated
4 people say
this answers the question
-
Subscriptions are not the same as friends. Don't you have any friends that do not like the same things as you??
I don't play golf, but I have friends that love golf. Just because I don't want golf stumbles is no reason we cannot be friends. Now I am being forced to subscribe to all my friends whose taste may not be exactly the same as mine.
Sarcasm is always a sign of a weak argument, BTW.
I’m peeved and annoyed
6 people say
this answers the question
-
Friends aren't going anywhere. The only change is the particular grouping of icons on your pages that used to say "Friends".
If it's a big concern, here's a suggestion: SUBSCRIBE.
Seriously? How many SU friends can anyone really have where neither of you subscribe to one another? And of those, how often do you exchange pages or PM's? And if it's so frequent, what's the problem with subscribing? Is that one additional entry on your "Discover" (formerly "What's New") tab really going to just completely ruin your stumbling experience? Yet you're SOOOO close to these people, you can't subscribe and click ONE (yes, ONE) check box to allow shares? Yeah, I know that check box is hard to find - it's gotta be at least 1 centimeter away from the Subscribe button. Heaven forbid anyone has to move the cursor that far.
So yeah, everyone go tell your "friends" good bye. Tell them all that you're sorry, but their tastes suck so bad that you cannot bring yourself to subscribing to their pages. Tell them it's just too much trouble to visit their pages anymore because their avatar isn't on your Stumblers tab anymore, and there's no chance in Hell you're gonna type a url to get to them or send them a PM. Yup, tell them they will cease to exist soon, and it's all SU's fault.
I’m amused
6 people say
this answers the question
-
If they kept "friends" and made it a folder visible only to each stumbler, like the inbox, I bet the brouhaha about "friends" would pass as quickly as a typhoon by the Philippines.
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Judging by this thread alone, it seems to me that SU is handling dissent very well. Why cant we stay on the issue? The thing is, or at least it seems to me, that some people still want the friends system. But when you think about it, what exactly is being taken away?
I think that:
1. If you are talking about friends in the conventional sense, sure you dont need a list to remind you who your friends are?
2. How is it that the new version will keep you from making new friends?
3. If you are talking about the list of people you can share sites with, the list is right there under your share button! Where does it say anywhere that list is not going to exist any longer?
4. I can definitely see why some still want the list. And so does Eric, one of the developers, so most likely we will be given something of that nature.
5. Even if such list is not implemented by SU, Im sure there will be scripts for it. And those of us who want the darn list can always make noise in the Feature Request group once the new interface takes over.
So, what exactly is being taken away here? Just the name "friends" which has attracted this whole myspace / facebook mentality in the first place. Talk about mistakes! This 'friends' categories should have never ever been implemented.
Though I do have some reservations about V4 (like the lack of a grid view for recent activities resulting in an enormous amount of clicks if we stay away for long periods of time) I would recommend SU any day, and in fact, I do. I have the best friends (yes, I did say friends), I subscribe to the best pages, and I have learned just so much here and have found so many wonderful sites! Im nothing but grateful for this place and am thrilled to see it going back to what it was before this "friends" category nightmare.
I’m thankful.
5 people say
this answers the question
-
The problem was caused by the word "friends" to begin with.
Review the history:
V1 & V2 had the word "friend" to describe mutual fans. This gave them the ability to send stumbles to each other. But because the word "friends" was so emotionally loaded, a lot of people would feel slighted and angry whenever a "friend" would "unfan" them.
Late in V2 (before V3) the word "fan" was replaced by "subscriber" and a new category was created called "friend" which was independent of "fan/subscriber" and was centered purely around sending stumbles. Subscriptions became a completely one-way affair, meaning mutual subscriptions gave no special means of communication (other than seeing them in whats new) between stumblers and whose only effect was on how the recommendation engine would decide what to stumble to you.
I thought this was a good idea at the time, but it also confused a lot of people who assumed that "friending" someone was the point to this exercise, ignoring the "subscription" in the process. This seems to be what SU wanted at the time since it was leaning more towards social networking under the then-new management, as evidenced by the prominence of the "friend" button on a stumblers reviews page. This feature was retained in V3.
The proposed V4 paradigm brings SU back to where it was prior to the friends/subscribers change which has been in place for around a year only, with the added feature that you can opt-out from receiving shares from a person without necessarily unsubscribing/"unfanning" (to use the old term).
The word "friend" was always the problem, not the subscription/sharing process. It gives a false impression of the functionality of the system.
My proposal is to retain the word "friend" in some capacity, but to give it no other significance than to provide one with a list of such and to make it easier to message them accordingly. I would place the "friend request" button within the messaging area and only activated if a message is sent and replied to. This would limit spurious friend requests and give it something closer to its actual meaning, someone you like and are willing to share messages with.
If you want to share stumbles with a friend you can always mutually subscribe, which tends to happen anyway.
3 people say
this answers the question
Due to volume, only the 15 most recent replies are being displayed
-
Inappropriate?Moderation merged this - I have complained.
There is no way my question can be considered to be the same as 'where is friends'
I know where 'friend' has gone. I RTFM
They've called friends - Mutual Subscribers who can Direct Share. ( MSWCDS )
Point one. The name change is stupid. It's counter intuitive to go from obvious to opaquely verbose.
Would Twitter change 'Followers'
Point two. The change solves nothing, but muddies the waters, or specifically my inbox.
I'm getting Please MSWCDS me requests. Where as they fixed that last time (not the first backwards step with V4 ) by putting Friend requests on a page.
What am I supposed to do? if I disable my inbox I've just made V4 even less social, and it was handicapped as it is.2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I was so addicted to SU that I even got my BFF (Best Friend Forever) Stumbling as well but now that we're BMSWCDSF's (Best Mutual Subscribers Who Can Direct Share Forever), our relationship has suffered. Dr. Phil, please help! -
Best Friend Forever, that's too easy, hmm in SU double-speak that would have to be something like Mutually Highly Regarded Eternal Trusted Associate Enabled for Direct Communication In All Circumstances
-
Inappropriate?MSWCDS requests? Omigod. If we weren't living through it, it would be funny.
I also have had topic incorrectly merged. I asked how I can identify X-rated stumblers and it was merged with "How do I know my own X-R-G rating".
This whole thing has really taught me a number of lessons that I should have learned a long time ago:
1. Be careful who you up and friend.
2. People who quote the Bible and talk love-love-love are the first to backstab you.
3. Standing up for what you believe in should be reserved for things that matter.
4. No good act goes unpunished, especially on SU. -
Inappropriate?I want Friends back
I want my Friend request page back.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Mutual Subscriber who can Direct Share is not a suitable description for the interpersonal interaction between users of Stumbleuopn availing themselves of the share facility, whilst at the same time there is insufficient notification given of other Users satus in regard to Subscriptions, mutual or otherwise, and no given indiciation another user has engaged the indication box to enable Mutual Subscriber who can Direct Share facility.
I’m happy
-
Inappropriate?well MSWCDS is fast than typing out the whole darn phrase, alternatively they could have stuck with friends. simples
But XineAnn you're right about 1 through 4. I've also met the same in the pub, in church, and pretty much everywhere, in meat space, and the interwebs.
Trouble is unless you befriend ie engage with someone, how do you get to know whether they are, to quote the bible :P, an Angel of Light, or the devil in disguise.
There are obvious spammers, others less so. Sometimes they only reveal their true purpose when they share.
friends share something of interest - to inform, to amuse, etc.
Spammers just hit you up with their crap
This is why I am objecting!
the MSWCDS label encourages sharing without regard for the receivers profile ie their interests - personality.
at least friend implies you are placing nice. -
Inappropriate?or just call them friends and don't worry about what SU calls them. -
Inappropriate?I actually think of them as web-pals, ie pen-pals but over the internet.
But. that isn't the point.
First SU has taken something firmly established in the minds of it's clients and changed it for no good reason.
second the change of terminology is verbose, - it's a barrier to entry; what is a new user to make of "Mutual Subscribers who can direct share"? Does that sound warm and social to anyone?
third the change encourages mindless sharing.
If I engage someone in FRIENDly manner ( anywhere ) It is implied I do so with due concern for their likes and dislikes - However "Mutual Subscribers who can Direct Share" because it is opaque, and not an intuitive label - suggests Users can just spam you with a page just because *they* like it.
Fourth they've stripped out the Friend Request notification page, so I can't keep track of who is subscribing to me, or ticking the box to allow shares.
( The mod's here seems hell bent on separating out individual facets of SU, and closing more global discussions, this flies in the face of the synergy that makes SU better than rest )
Lastly after doing all this SU tells me V4 is more social! in the face of double-speak like MSWCDS and the Orwellian moderation I feel I am in 1984.
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?I can't answer this question. I am lost. The new interface is disappointing and alienating.
I’m confused
-
Inappropriate?I said I was not posting in here again, BUT the title of this thread was originally "Is This a Done Deal or Not?" It was not "Where are the Friends in the new StumbleUpon." It was a done deal from day one, and it did not matter what we thought of the friend's issue. We all wasted a whole lot of time thinking our input mattered. It didn't. Enough said. I am through in GS because you don't care what I think, or really what anybody thinks. You mislead me thinking that you cared, and you would even consider changing your mind about the friend issue. It has now veered into a nasty discussion and a lot of complaints that are falling on deaf ears.
I really do like to have friends, and by that I mean people that talk to me, and share with me, and do not totally ignore me. People that care about me and have some form of contact with me are always welcome to be my friend. At least until SU cuts me off from having anymore. I am about at the limit now and I think I have 500 subscriptions or very close to it. What a sad state when we can't even make new friends, or mutuals or whatever it is called now, Maybe it should be called mutuals with benefits. The benefit being sharing of sites, I guess.
I do have some friends that have never sent me the first share or ever even sent me a PM saying "hi, how are you doing?". Those people I can spare to make room for people that care about me, which is what I am being forced to do. It saddens me to even have to let them go, because I used to have hope they would eventually make some sort of an effort to get to know me, or at least talk to me. Sigh, it really doesn't matter anyway. I am very depressed over the whole thing, and things around here in general. Friends are fighting and people are assuming the worst of each other, and it just makes me so sad. I'm not even angry. I am just heartbroken over the direction we are going in.
I’m sad
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
As for friends I liked an alternative to subscriptions (because some of my friends fit better there) but what SU calls anyone -- given great terminology like testimonials, I do not care.
But I would just like to second the lack of satisfaction with getsatisfaction -- I am not at all sure it is a good measure of the SU community concerns about (friends and everything/anything else). I have to admit I do not know because I have mostly given up. -
Inappropriate?@DAngel799
It's interesting to learn the title of this thread isn't even genuine!
I had a question merged here, had your original title been in place I'd have felt less abused by the process - because I was not asking where friends had gone.
We know where friends have gone, SU insists on calling our friends Mutual Subscribers who can Direct Share. It's a complex and needlessly verbose title that says nothing about the social aspect of SU and encourages spamming.
As I said to a friend on SU. What would you call someone who sends you sites? An Enemy? a Foe?
The basis for exchange of ideas using web pages is a friendly one, it hinges upon acting in a friendly manner - it implies thought and concern, not just blithely sending something ie spam, but rather knowing the other users interests and sending something that might interest them.
I began the process of running with V4 essentially neutral, after contributing over 6000 discoveries to SU and being unapologetically evangelical over the years, yet after reading and posting here I am left feeling disenfranchised with SU - it's clear TPTB don't really stumble themselves - don't understand the social dynamic, and don't value the core users.
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?We are now down wind of a lot of merges that were a solution to spam and too many threads. But some, even many, of those merges were incorrect.
ForestHippy started a thread on the matter of merged threads that some might find relevant: Don't merge established threads.
Threads are mismarked implemented, answered, or solved by "the company" and there is no recourse. This is exacerbated by the fact that I have never, yet, ever seen a company representative admit they'd made a mistake. Well wait, George did once. And I bit him for him. I'm sorry about that.
Most of us would forgive a mistake.
I’m afraid that we're not making any progress at all
