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
71
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
-
Inappropriate?I understand your concerns and I'm not trying to argue against them, just saying how I understand the changes in case thats helpful. Of course I may be wrong (I frequently am) but I guess someone will correct me if I am.
As far as I know anyone can PM anyone else unless they have their preferences set to not accept messages. Thats as it is now and I'm not aware of any change to that. So newcomers will be as free as they are now to break the ice, say hello and become friendly with existing users.
From the way its working so far it looks to me as though existing 'friends' are being rolled over into V4 as mutual subscribers with shares so maybe you won't need to do anything about your existing friends. However after that 'friends' will cease to exist so yes, anyone new you want to share with after implementation you'll need to be a mutual subscriber and tick the 'accept share' box. Thats my understanding anyway..
I'm guessing the reason friends is not possible as a continuing option is that it would perpetuate the existing system (and the confusion some feel it causes between friends and subscribers) and SU is looking for a simpler, easier to understand system. Plus 'sharing' was the only actual function friends had and since thats now associated with subscribing it left 'friends' as a category without any actual function.
Speaking purely personally, I'll subscribe if someone has good content and tick to accept shares almost as a matter of course. If I have any problems with any shares I get I'll just untick to stop them. I'll contine to engage in 'friend' activities with the handful of people I chat to and with any new person that seems interesting. So the way I actually use SU in relation to friends and sociability won't change that I can see.
But I'm not you and I understand everyone uses SU differently. As I said, maybe someone will jump in and give you some definitive answers ..:))
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Nothing is going to change so to speak SU...the name friends is just being replaced by suscriptions...I have a handful of subs that are not mutual friends and with the new they become friends so to speak but I liked when they were separated as I would like those that I share & PM with most to be easier to see & access instead of having to go through the list each time to find them...
I’m amused
-
Inappropriate?I think SU is very concerned by our requests. It is not a lost cause.
If a good amount of stumblers vote and argue, they can change the direction of the wind.
I think this new system is too confusing to work a long time...
I’m confident
-
Inappropriate?I support the direction in regards to friends as outlined by George here, and I hope SU stays the course on this issue.
http://getsatisfaction.com/stumbleupo...
(hope the link works)
This system is far more simple.
Your friends are not going to go away.
with the options of subscribing/ unsubscribing and sharing/not sharing, we now have the tools to better control our content. This is a good thing.
Friendship is a personal thing, and how it works between two people is up to them.
I’m thankful, supportive
-
Inappropriate?Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree. While I can see the benefit for the people that have been here a very long time and are really well established, I can't see any for the newer people, like me, who still do not feel totally at home. Maybe if I had been here as long as the supporters I'd feel different, but I have not and I don't. I did not even get very active until six months after I joined, but now I am.
I have noticed that most, not all, of the supporters do have subscriptions over 1,000 and are almost overflowing with friends. I have chosen my friends carefully and I treasure them. I also like having my friends separate from subscribers and now they are not. What a pain it is going to be to even find them in my list. I want them all together.
I am also going to miss other things too, like the marvelous scripts we use, but that is another thread.
I do hope that the person that said this issue is not closed is correct, because I am very, very unhappy. I wish their could be some sort of compromise where everybody could be happy. I still like the optional choice for friends, and I think it could work. Please just consider it for a minute or two.
I’m sad
1 person says
this answers the question
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I agree very much---I like my separate lists-- works well-- I have chosen my friends list carefully-- I am subscribed to by others who are just fine on that list--- my subscription list-- seperate also-- are many people whose content I like and perhaps want to explore-- but not friend- those who subscribe to me-- I believe may do the same--
There are a number of people here who I think are isolated for one reason or another and have formed communities-- that give support, has any thought been given at all to the fact SU is used in different ways by different groups-- we are not all alike-- -
Inappropriate?I think what you are talking about is an issue of How subscribers/subscriptions are ordered in your lists
There are a couple of threads here about that. Some good suggestions have been made.
I agree that finding people in your subscriber/subscription list is currently time consuming, even for someone like me, who does not have a huge list.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?It seems we have no choice but to be forced to follow the higher powers that believe they know what's best for the greater good of quality sharing the best of the best. But then again I love a good fight and enjoy eating hot shots like you while I'm still sleeping before having a real breakfast.
You don't care who gets hurt in the path of your plans or if many long time stumblers leave unhappy or not.
Friends have already become divided and can't come to a mutual ground so I guess we'll have stand by our real friends who care about each other and the rest of you who won't have any friends left at all can just go back to your lonely little lives.
I will stand with my real friends and not let anyone get in my way of keeping them, So take your best shot and try to separate us because it won't happen.
This is suppose to be a community of everyone not just the ones who opinions carry the most weight around here because they have been here longer or think they are right and everyone is wrong because they don't except change of what they feel happy with already.
Make improvements if you want to make a better place but don't take away the foundation that hold it all together, Not images, Not web sites but friends who need each other, Enjoy each other and Spend their day together here.
1 person says
this answers the question
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Sure do agree David-- I feel very helpless, and I simply do not understand the pressing need to make wholesale changes---- Sure tweak here and there if you like-- see how things work--- I myself have made wonderful friends from all over the world--- and its great-- SU is more than just access to web sites and images-- I learned a long time ago--if its not broken-- it doesn't need fixing---
-
Inappropriate?I have over 3,000 subscribers so it's going to be very difficult to find v3 friends. Who was having such a hard time with the way the lists are in the present version?
I've been here long enough to know better than to think the staff listens to more than a handful of stumblers, myself excluded. No offense to the geeks, but I think this version is only good for geeks.
I’m frustrated
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?What ever happened to: If its not broken, don't fix it. The current friends/subcribers system is just fine the way it is.
I’m cornfused and frustrated.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?i don't ever appreciate the lack of being able to choose my own friends..i don't like that we have no say..well, not any say that will do any good..i think it would have been more positive to ask...let us vote..i have a solid core of friends here & i like that the most..followed quickly & closely by being able to keep the things i find..i've loved SU from the moment i came here..there is not another site like it..i'm happy with that..i'd like it to be worlds different from any of the other sites..as far as subscribers & friends...that's difficult to comprehend? really? this is coming from people with above average i.q,'s? can decipher codes...make pages do amazing things..write beautiful blogs..then can't figure out friends...hmmm...this is just frustrating..
I’m frustrated
-
Inappropriate?why not just add another area that contains all the people that can send you stuff and another area for people that want to send you stuff?
I personally would prefer for the devs to keep it like it is in V3 but if thats not possible at least make it easier for you to find your friends and (you could say) "friend requests".
I also dont like the fact that you have to subscribe to someone in order to send them something. as far as i can tell the current friends and subscribers system allows you more freedom to chose who you want to become friends with and subscribe
I’m somewhat neutral
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?With the new system .. I will socialise with my friends in exactly the same way .. message .. share .. do whatever I do now. I only have a handful of people I actually think of as friends in any real sense so its not an issue. I will also be able to make new friends by messaging new people or responding when they message me. No aspect of my ability to socialise is diminished. So from the perspective of SU socialising I have no problem at all with the new system. I welcome it for the way it simplifies what many have found is a confusing and over-complicated system.
There is a separate issue which is getting tangled up in this though and that is convenience .. ease of use .. how users will easily keep track of who they choose to share with under the new system. I personally think it'l be OK but others have talked of having a more easily accessible list of 'mutual shares' and I believe theres a separate thread here about that. I'm sure if there really is a problem the devs can make it easier to keep track. Might be worth trying it and seeing how it works in practice first though.
For all of us there will continue to be a small'ish number of people that we have regular contact with, chat to, like.. We can think of them as friends. We can think of them as anything we want. They will still be whatever they are now without the need for a formal categorization. We'll still be doing exactly the same with them as we do now. Or at least I will.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?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
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I like this solution.
-
Inappropriate?I always liked the old v1 better than the current one. It all seems to be over a mannerism in words. Kind of reminds me of all that bickering that used to go on in our local church here over minute issues that only meant something to a handful of people. Stuff like this was what made me opt out of Stumble in the first place-I just wanted to surf the net and get some links from others with an occasional message or two.
I’m indifferent
-
Inappropriate?I like being able to share sites with people without being obliged to subscribe to their content.
What will the new subscriber limits be, that is the question...
I’m indifferent
-
Inappropriate?I was wondering about that myself, Jen.
Will we be able to subscribe and friend 1000 people now? Or will it be 500 non mutual subscriptions + 500 mutuals?
Somebody please shed some light on the matter. -
Inappropriate?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
-
Inappropriate?what will happen to my friends that arent subscribed to me? will they no longer be able to send me stuff when the new system takes over? or will they automatically subscribe to me?
I’m wondering
-
Inappropriate?@He11Kn1ght -- that is a very good question I'd like to know the answer to as well.
I’m curious
-
Inappropriate?@Dangel799
"While I can see the benefit for the people that have been here a very long time and are really well established, I can't see any for the newer people, like me, who still do not feel totally at home."
I'm very sad some stumblers may feel as stranger here. If someone is not welcoming here, he has nothing to do on a forum where we exchange ideas...
Everyone of us is new since the beta is very new and we are talking about it.
And we aren't in a ego war, so everyone may share or impose one opinion.
He11Kn1ght :"why not just add another area that contains all the people that can send you stuff and another area for people that want to send you stuff?
I personally would prefer for the devs to keep it like it is in V3 but if thats not possible at least make it easier for you to find your friends and (you could say) "friend requests".
I also dont like the fact that you have to subscribe to someone in order to send them something. as far as i can tell the current friends and subscribers system allows you more freedom to chose who you want to become friends with and subscribe"
Good suggestions.
And agree with Dinamic-Polarity: time consuming to find someone in the list, even the small list, impossible for the long lists!
I read the new SU would be "more searchable"...
I’m undecided
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?@hellknight and @sebastian ... just as information .. I had a 'friend' who was a mutual subcriber in V3. I unsubscribed then checked the status in V4 (beta). She was shown as a mutual subscriber with the two-way share indicator. You could try it yourself. That suggests to me that they're just going to roll all 'friends' over as mutual subscribers with shares (fine by me). If they do, no-one loses their ability to share with existing friends or has to take any additional action at all. It just happens automatically. But thats just my assumption based on how beta is currently working. At some point later in the beta testing perhaps an official confirmation thats whats going to happen might allay any concerns ..:)
I’m not worried
-
Inappropriate?I think Sebastian had a great point about the friends issue. We need to keep them separate and we have to call them something. I personally like the word friends, but if you want to call them VIPs or something else that is fine. I would like the ability to add more to my special group, too.
I strongly agree with Perce-Neige on this point
"Everyone of us is new since the beta is very new and we are talking about it.
And we aren't in a ego war, so everyone may share or impose one opinion."
I agree, and sadly I have already lost one friend. I can always agree to disagree and no hard feelings on my part anyway.
Oh, and my feelings are my feelings. They just are, and I cannot change them. It is my first time in Beta so it is a new and strange experience for me. Next time I am sure it will be much easier.
I would also like an answer to He11Kn1ght's question:
what will happen to my friends that arent subscribed to me? will they no longer be able to send me stuff when the new system takes over? or will they automatically subscribe to me?
I’m confused
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Not happy about the proposed changes.
Losing a friend is bad enough but losing
200+ friends in a heartbeat will be devastating!
I’m resigned
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?A sad loss that would be ! I certainly don't want all my subscribers to inundate me with pages they send ! Those I get from my good friends - about 10 or so - are amply sufficient since I like to find new content myself.
If you had left the friends section empty when you made the last change, things would have been much easier because nobody would have felt offended by removing them from the friends list. So my friends list still contains many people I never contact but who i don't want to offend by deleting them from the list.
Now, when things gradually start to work you want to remove the feature.
Not a clever idea !
I’m frustrated
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?@karenak .. I think you can just leave the 'accept shares' box ticked for those 10 people you want to accept the shares from and untick it for anyone else you wanted to subscribe to but not accept shares from. So I doubt if you'll be flooded with shares if you aren't now. Probably much less so.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?"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
-
Inappropriate?As best I can tell, if you are "friends" with someone now, but there is NO subscription on either end, then those friends don't show up anywhere in Beta (yet).
Page shares are only available to mutual subscribers, since the check box only appears AFTER you subscribe, and since it's a 2-way street, only mutual subscribers will be able to send page shares.
Oddly enough, if you subscribe to another person, the DO appear in the list to the right from your inbox page.
I'd like to see some changes here, if I may. If I subscribe to someone, I think they should automatically be allowed to send me pages. However, they should have the option to remove me from their share list if they so choose, so they don't have to sift through people they may not know to find those that they do. -
Inappropriate?Any return to the old 'subscribers'/'mutual subscribers as friends' systems makes more sense. That was how SU was before v 3.
Having 2 type of relationships as noted is confusing, and people friend you to spam you.
I don't use SU much these days. There are many reasons for that. But 2 of the first reasons I cut back were that the network is often spammed, and hostage to 'thumb me up' voting rings. This change should reduce that, and reduce complexity.
anything that reduces complexity is good in my view. And besides, you can be 'friends' on facebook, twitter or friendfeed. People use SU, at least the main content discoverers, for different reasons.
innovatorAU.
I’m hopeful we simplify
1 person says
this answers the question
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
@innovatorAU
More history
The friends/subscribers system actually pre-dated V3 by several months and was a separate feature development that many had clamored for. The problem with the old fans/mutuals system was that the only way to prevent shares was to do the socially unacceptable, to "unfriend" someone. Separating friends from subscribers made it possible to be non-social with your subscriptions and still have shares with "friends."
I agree that this new proposal will simplify SU, but I still think some sort of social category with functions unrelated to stumbling would be good for those who use SU as their primary social network. Not everyone wants to be on Facebook and you cannot enjoy messaging while sharing links on that platform. -
Inappropriate?@Steve: you are right. If there was a subscription from any of the parts, it seems like they are being rolled over as mutuals, but if they were just friends with no subscriptions involved, they are being left out of the list.
@Innovator: Im happy too that SU is going towards the content direction again. Less friendship motivated by spam, and "mutual subscribers" doesnt mean mutual sharers. We can opt in and out of shares if we dont like what is being sent to us. That makes sense to me.
I’m ... I forgot what I am.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?innovator AU said "And besides, you can be 'friends' on facebook, twitter or friendfeed. People use SU, at least the main content discoverers, for different reasons."
I do not use those places, and I joined SU when it was exactly like it is now. I have made some wonderful friends, and making friends was encouraged when I joined SU. I don't think you are really suggesting that people leave here now and start over somewhere else are you? Surely not.
I regret so many people have gotten themselves in a bind, and are receiving spam than they do not want, but don't punish those of us that are not. You do have the option to defriend those people and not get anymore from them right now. I have chosen my friends carefully, and I am very happy with the way things are. I am hoping we can work things out where everyone will be "get satisfaction" and nobody will leave.
I’m sad
-
Inappropriate?I've been on SU a year as of Oct 13th - V3 is the only version I know, but I appreciate the knowledge and wisdom of those that have known previous incarnations of the system have brought to the table. I joined Stumbleupon because a Friend recommended it, initially because of the websurfing. I stayed because of the social networking. I am already on MySpace and Facebook. Each platform is different. I like the separation of Friends vs Subscriptions vs Subscribers...it's a clear visual on one screen in V3. The little green dots of Friends online brighten my day. I subscribe to every friend I have, besides others pages that I admire their creativity and content. To have "Friends" and "Subscribers" blended into one category, to me, is confusing. It also doesn't help that currently in Beta both Subscribers and Subscribed To are in the Inbox Contacts area. How in the world are the power-users with 100's if not 1000's of subscribers going to cope with that, the time it will take just to find someone that they really want to PM?
So...Is the "Friend" issue a done deal? Having George repeat the message over and over doesn't actually answer the question (no offense George). If TPTB have the Friends category already chucked in the bin, let us know so we can stop spinning our wheels. This part of the Beta issues alone is getting Stumblers hot under the collar and emotions are running high, with Friends on either side of the debate. Friends are being lost because of it and that's totally not cool.
Hey, I get it that "my cheese is being moved", and that I may need to "get my big girl panties on" and deal with the changes. If I can master a tier-one system like SAP, SU should be a snap. Just give me the clear and concise facts, give me the tools and information I need, upfront. I'm betting the majority of SU users have no clue that change is coming, whether we like it or not. A vote on major changes might be nice (doubtful, but nice thought), because we stumblers/end-users are still customers, even if we are of the non-paying variety. Wouldn't you think TPTB would want to keep the majority happy?
Thank you to everyone that has posted in this thread and the others concerning the V4 Beta system. Without ongoing dialog...what's the point?
I vote for keeping the "Friends" category as is.
I’m vexed and annoyed.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?The 'friends' and 'subscribers' thing has been a contentious issue ever since SU introduced it. Originally (before my time) there wasn't that separation. Other social networks successfully have only one kind of relationship. Facebook has friends. Twitter has followers (subscribers). SU tried having both in an attempt to appeal to everyone and, in the opinion of some, failed to satisfy anyone fully. The fairly recent separation of 'friends' and 'subscribers' saw some people being flooded by requests for 'friend' status from total strangers and subjected to pressure from spammers to add them. The cores were full of discussion about this.Much worse than that, many newcomers genuinely found the choice confusing. Coming from other social networks and not realising SU was different they would almost invariably take the 'friend' option, not understanding that it was different on SU, and ignore the 'subscribe' option. For some the separation and choice worked but for many it was not only confusing but seemed to be moving SU away from its core purpose of content discovery and sharing.
SUs attempt to simplify its interface isn't happening in isolation. I see that both Myspace and Facebook are undertaking similar exercises to simplify user interfaces that have become too complicated to make sense to new and often casual users. I think its in the nature of software development that things get added and added until you reach a point where its overloaded and you need to get back to basics and think clearly about what you're trying to achieve. Getting rid of the confusion caused by two seperate 'relationship' categories is, to me, an absolutely crucial part of SUs revamp.
I can understand the 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' argument but the problem is that for some it *is* broke and has been since SU tried the experiment of trying to run two categories of relationship in parallel. For me its been profoundly broken to the point where I seriously thought about leaving SU (no loss to anyone but myself) and its only the proposed changes that have given me optimism that SU can be as engaging and entertaining as it used to be.
Now that the option to share is associated with 'subscribing' it leaves the 'friend' category with no useful function whatsoever. There is no justification for having it as a separate category. It adds nothing to what people can do anyway via chat, share, message .. all of the other elements of socializing available. I'm losing absolutely nothing that I want or need, but I am seeing a whole layer of confusion removed from the user interface.
If people want some way of being able to privately identify a select group of people ... best buddies .. mutual sharers .. whatever you want to call them thats an entirely different matter. That might even be a useful additional feature but that does not necessitate a whole different category, lacking any function, that addes confusion to the interface. Thats taking a sledgehammer to crack a walnut in my opinion.
But there you go .. who'd be an SU developer ? You can't please all the people all of the time. While I totally respect everyone elses views and preferences I don't think SU can satisfy everyone and I can only say that from my own perspective (which is all I can speak for) getting rid of the separate 'friends' category is the best thing they've done in a very long time ..:)
In response to the basic question of the thread though, I took the staff response and the fact that the thread is marked as 'question answered' to mean that the changes will be implemented as proposed.
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?@Ellie
As I see it, the problem is not that SU has two categories of social functions, but that it tried to have only one - "friends." Subscribers have no social functionality.
In the original concept, it had "fans" and when people fanned each other, it assumed a social relationship and called it "mutuals" who then had the ability to send stumbles to each other. The other thing it allowed was for messaging to be limited to these mutual subscribers if that was set in the preferences.
Rather than debate this point here, I will propose something... 'scuse... -
Inappropriate?@ sebastian .. so aren;t they pretty much just going back to the original model (fans=subscribers) but with the added refinement of choosing to share or not ? That refinement addresses what was perceived as a problem with the original model (the inability to disengage shares from mutual subscriptions). Can't see why it won't work ..:)
-
Inappropriate?I understand now! SU has decided that its employees are not creative or good enough to compete with the successful social networking sites, so rather than be an also ran, they're pulling the plug so that no one can accuse them of losing out to Facebook and Twitter. It's a pride thing but personally, I enjoyed being a part of the underdog community and I value the friends I have made here. I've seen SU make many mistakes over the years but looks like this one will be the BIG ONE that finally comes back to bite them in the butt! I really could care less about the whole "supposed new websites" gimmick SU pretends to offer. I can find all the amazing sites I need through this thing called Google. I'm here to see my FRIENDS content and meet cool new FRIENDS. What a Marketing blunder to get rid of the most important part of any social networking site. Anybody Home at SU?
I have zero spam problems here.
I’m Disappointed
-
Inappropriate?We were told this new version was MORE social.
Sends is a non issue for me. If I see a site perfect for a friend I can send it in a pm like I used to do, but I really would like to be able see/find my friend non subscribers.
My friends are people I have met at SU, so if I could actually stand to use facebook (it just seems chaotic to me), that would still not solve the problem.
I’m sad
-
Inappropriate?I don't want to lose friends or subscribers.....or who I subscribe too. I don't want to lose anything. Period. -
Inappropriate?@Keith
I think it's pretty clear that subscribers will stay as is. It's just the "friends" that is being debated. -
Inappropriate?It's not the end of the world here - click "Subscribe" on your friends' pages, and you'll see no real change.
The only "casualties" (if you will) are those people with whom you are currently friends with, but whose pages you may not necessarily enjoy or want to see on "What's New" or whatever it's called now. I have a very small handful that fall into this category, so it's not a big loss. It's not like those people will cease to exist on SU - I just may have to type the url to their page instead of clicking an avatar.
I subscribe to everyone that I communicate with regularly, or share pages with, so I had to visit 30 or 40 "friends" just to find one that I didn't subscribe to and who did not subscribe to me.
Still, it's the equivalent of losing a shortcut to a program on your computer. So you actually have to go through the menu(s) to launch it instead of just clicking an icon on your desktop. The program is still there, and still works as it always has.
Otherwise we're still just debating labels and nomenclature, not function.
I’m indifferent
1 person says
this answers the question
2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Must be more than just a label otherwise why would SU choose to eliminate such an important comfort word like "friends." They're obviously going to lose more customers than they gain by such an ill advised move, not to mention all the free press they'll lose by taking SU out of the "Social Media" category.
-
Don't get me wrong - I'm not exactly happy that they've decided to eliminate "friends" from SU. I've always (going back years) been adamant that several of my SU friends have become very much "real life" friends, regardless of their distance or whether or not I'll ever meet any of them in person. I thought the entire debate over whether SU should call people "friends" or "fans" or "subscribers" was not all that important. What SU calls them has no bearing whatsoever on how I feel about them, how I communicate with them, or whether or not they are my friend or not.
I've had no interruption of any kind so far using Beta, and it's been just over a week now. Nothing has changed, so I don't feel anything has been lost - the only real difference for me is the name of the tab on which their avatar appears. -
Inappropriate?@Steve .. I think thats absolutely right. Its about names and a comfort zone, not functionality. Unlike Facebook or Twitter who sensibly have one name for relationships SU experimented with having two and confused a lot of people in the process. As far as I can see, this change just emphasises their core commitment to content discovery and sharing, which is what differentiates them in the marketplace.
While I can't see any justification whatsoever for a functionless public category called 'friends' I *can* see that some people might want a totally *private* list of those they chat to most .. share with most .. whatever .. call it a 'best buddies' list or a 'mates' list or even a 'friends' list. Something so they can see at a glance when a few people they privately select are online. Theres a seperate thread where thats suggested.
I'm sure within days of implementation some of the great script wizards on SU will be offering exactly that or SU might consider it as a feature. Either way its do-able without needing a seprate public category for 'friends'.
-
Inappropriate?It is more than a shortcut, it is a method of collecting and organizing people you care about but don't want to subscribe to.
The script wizards usually base their stuff on greasemonkey ;-(1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I'm not in disagreement - everyone is welcome to look back through the debates we had on "friends" vs. "subscribers" a year or so ago and see my stance on the matter (Features Group I believe?). I can't speak for anyone else, I just know that I do subscribe to 95% of my current "Friends", so losing that category isn't a very huge loss for me. Maybe I'm in the minority and most people subscribe to far fewer - I can't say.
But isn't that what shortcuts are? Keep your most commonly used programs organized and together in one place so they're easy to find and access, rather than browsing through the directory for them or typing the URL or Path? That's all I was saying - it's not as if our non-subscribed friends are going away, it's just going to be a bit of a pain to get to them. -
Inappropriate?really, all you have to do is click the share button on the toolbar....the people you share with ( the FUNCTION that was called friends) are all listed right there, with the most frequent at the top.
I’m confused by the confused
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I do not use "Friends" category for shares, in fact I don't really do shares. That is why SU works, when it does, it gives us the freedom to use it as we see fit.
-
Inappropriate?I have been on SU since March 2009 and have enjoyed finding my feet in SU. I have to admitt that I have made some amazing friends here and I like them being classed as friends. I have over 200 subscribin to my pages and would this rather confusing having one heading for all. So if the powers that be could leave the friends heading alone and keep susbscribers and friends seperate as in my oppinion this is right. Thank you for listening to my point.
I’m sad
-
Inappropriate?Okay, I have an idea which I think will make everyone happy!
Since those for the new SU are in agreement that "FRIENDS" is just a word and is of no consequence, instead of using the word "SHARE", how about changing "FRIENDS" to "ENEMIES"? It's just a word.
I’m Half Kidding
-
Inappropriate?And BTW, what's with this horrible "Get Satisfaction" thing where you can't even click on a Stumbler's name to go visit their NON SOCIAL NETWORK page? I guess since the new purpose of SU is NOT to make friends, it doesn't really matter. At least I won't have to spend so much time on my page any more since they'll be no one to come see it.
I’m Sad
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I am with you on this. I don't like it at all.
-
Inappropriate?In basic terms, one type of relationship makes more functional sense, and the reality was the friend aspect was the start of the spamfest (friend me so you'll thumb my content). Only those inside would know the numbers, but anecdotally, they support the spam over content ratio since the earlier Friends change then the v3 change (which in my mind was one change to copy other social networks).
In short I agree with @Ellie and others that a return to content-based direction is good. It's a return to the core function of SU - great community & great content.
In my view it enhances the value that SU offers both me, and all of us as clients of what is ostensibly a free in dollar terms, but high in time-commitment service. Actually the SU was built by all the stumblers, especially the core. But the quality of your stumbles you see depends on the quality of the content functionality, not the friending function. You can have 'friends' in any social network.
The key to reverting is an elegant implementation, and that will reduce any problems. Numerous good ideas have been put forward on this list and others about tick boxes & classifications. So the opportunity is there for SU devs to do a great job...
History shows when spam or frustration increases all the core creative people leave networks, and reduce their utility to all. After all, SU is an idea, based on a core base of active people donating their time to find content, or vote content. The less that is motivated by spam or popularity contests (distortion) the better.
innovatorAU
I’m yaha!
1 person says
this answers the question
2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I'd love to know how the original intent of finding and voting on content translates into what SU has become. SU offers no greater content of outside websites than any other search engine. What makes SU so very special is the ability to create our own unique sites within the system, share these sites with "FRIENDS" and see their sites. Eventually our "FRIENDS" learn what their "FRIENDS" enjoy and can send outside web pages they've learned we will probably enjoy. This whole rating and thumbs up/down thing is nothing more than a silly gimmick which has no real value except in the minds of the powers at SU because they think it somehow makes them special when in fact what makes SU special evolved accidentally yet has managed to elude them due too tunnel vision. SU IS great but not at all for the reasons which the powers would like to think.
-
Very well stated InnovatorAU!
-
This reply was removed on 10/03/09.
see the change log -
This reply was removed on 10/03/09.
see the change log -
How could that be? Not even my comments are being deleted and they're pretty harsh against management.
-
Inappropriate?I have a really special relationship with one of the staff.1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I hear that. I had one of them ban me but was reinstated after it was proven I did nothing wrong except to disagree.......Harshly.
-
Inappropriate?We were told the new SU is more social and here it is being praised for being more content based.
(Real information would be helpful.)
I agree the friend thing as it stands confused new people -- friend -- not subscriber is a normal term for social interaction so many new stumblers just jumped for friends the way I originally jumped for subscribing.
Before they gave us "friends" I wanted a way of marking my social contacts on SU and I still want that -- I would love to have it work better than the current system and I think it could easily be done. The way that communities and contacts overlap at SU it is quite easy to develop contacts, who do not share many of your interests so that subscribing is not reasonable method of keeping in contact.
I’m not optimistic
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Color Me Twitter - you might as well call SU that if you take away our friends, couldn't get more impersonal if you tried and looks like a few million members don't know what's happening here or just don't care enough to stand up for what's more important to the few who do.
Friendship is the cooperative and supportive relationship between two or more people. In this sense, the term connotes a relationship which involves mutual knowledge, esteem, affection, and respect along with a degree of rendering service to friends in times of need or crisis.
Friends will welcome each other's company and exhibit loyalty towards each other, often to the point of altruism. Their tastes will usually be similar and may converge, and they will share enjoyable activities.
They will also engage in mutually helping behavior, such as the exchange of advice and the sharing of hardship. A friend is someone who may often demonstrate reciprocating and reflective behaviors. Yet for some, the practical execution of friendship is little more than the trust that someone will not harm them.
Value that is found in friendships is often the result of a friend demonstrating the following on a consistent basis:
* the tendency to desire what is best for the other
* sympathy and empathy
* honesty, perhaps in situations where it may be difficult for others to speak the truth, especially in terms of pointing out the perceived faults of one's counterpart
* mutual understanding
In a comparison of personal relationships, friendship is considered to be closer than association, although there is a range of degrees of intimacy in both friendships and associations.
Friendship and association can be thought of as spanning across the same continuum. The study of friendship is included in sociology, social psychology, anthropology, philosophy, and zoology. Various theories of friendship have been proposed, among which are social exchange theory, equity theory, relational dialectics, and attachment styles.
just in case you don't know a true friend is or really don't care which is becoming very clear now - I know my friends matter very much to me and They feel exactly the same about me and would never give up our friendship no matter what happens to us
I’m Very Cheesed Off and Burnt to a Crisp
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Well put David! I would have liked to check out your SU site but unfortunately with this impersonal "Get Satisfaction" comment site, I get no satisfaction of being able to meet new friends whose comments are in sync with my feelings.
-
Inappropriate?Well .. speaking personally ... I have no trouble knowing who the handful of real friends I have on SU are .. the ones I actually talk to .. message with .. have some form of communication with on a regular basis. All the tools I need to sustain those friendships are available to me now and they will be available to me when the new interface is implemented. All any of us can do is offer our own personal perspective .. none of us speaks for anyone else .. but I don't have a problem with it at all.
-
Inappropriate?"Friends" take precedence in "Is Subscribed to" over the stumblers one is actually subscribed to. This makes "friendship" very popular with people who are trying to market their pages.
I expect that if "friendship" were maintained as a private feature, available only to the subscriber and carrying no "SU karma weight" that it would lose much of its anthropological, sociological, and philosophical significance.
Would friendship still be important to those who don't want to see it go? I can't imagine it would be difficult to implement as an add-on, although one would have to ask ForestHippy or Thlayli or Onyxstone to know for sure.
I’m sure I know who my friends are and don't need an app to identify them for me.
-
Inappropriate?XineAnn replied 3 minutes ago
"Friends" take precedence in "Is Subscribed to" over the stumblers one is actually subscribed to. This makes "friendship" very popular with people who are trying to market their pages. "
Market their pages ? What is this a White sale on Labor Day at Macy's ?
If I want to subscribe to people I have nothing in common with I'll order some magazines I'll never read.
I feel like I just walked in on a really bad B movie with no end in sight , Just throw the switch and turn off the lights on your way out .
I’m at least make some popcorn
-
Inappropriate?What does that even mean "market your page"?
I'm interested in getting to know more people, and to be a real friends with them. I know some of you have all the friends you want, and are not interested in making more. I am. I have not been here as long as some of you have.
I’m frustrated
-
Inappropriate?What I understood Xine to mean in saying 'market your page' ( I could be wrong) is that SU has a long-standing problem with spammers and people who are here primarily to promote their business interests and external blogs. If you haven't come across this then thats great but it does exist. For them, getting as many 'friends' as possible is the object of the exercise. They want the visibility of appearing on public friends lists and to promote their sites through 'shares'. For clarity .. I'm not saying thats what all 'friends are ... not saying its a problem for everyone .. I have no more idea of the overall size of the problem than does anyone else here .. but its definitely within the experience of some and at least one of the reasons there are so many 'total stranger' friend requests. Not the only reason, but one.
As to keeping friends .. you and I are officially 'friends' on SU at the moment. After V4 is introduced that category dissapears but you can still send me shares and message me and do anything else you want. There is nothing happening between us now that won't continue to happen exactly the same in V4.
I like new friends too .. which is why I'm glad all of the tools newcomers need to break the ice .. say hello .. get to know me and sustain a friendship will be available to both them and me in V4. I look forward to making new friends there .. and retaining old ones like you ..:) -
Inappropriate?Bring "FRIENDS" back before you cause undue stress and sadness for untold numbers of Stumblers. I've seen SU screw up time and time again when making changes but eliminating "FRIENDS" will go down as the worst marketing blunder since New Coke. Don't you have meetings with any smart Marketing people before making arbitrary decisions? It's taken me years to develop my SU friends and now I can't even find them to see their newest content and/or email them. There's oh so much more wrong like what am I supposed to do now, learn HTML instead of the easy edit function you used to have? Why make things more difficult? Defies all logic whatsoever. You make me sad. More social yet no friends, in the bizzaro world maybe. I really don't want to find "Friends" outside SU to force them onto the poorly thought out new su besides, they're my friends on Facebook, I don't need them here. I'd be too embarrassed to recommend SU.
I’m Not a Happy Camper
-
Inappropriate?We disagree. Your personal experience is not my personal experience. I am continually getting my ass kissed in message by spammers who gush about how wonderful my pages are (and usually when they are singularly mediocre -- don't say it!) and can they be friends a la facebook. I go to their pages and it's one-line reviews of stumblers saying "Great Blog".
Would an optional "friends" display work for the "wants friends" contingent?
It looks like someone's going to be unhappy here. But if it's an option, then maybe it can only be the developers. -
Inappropriate?XineAnn said:
Would an optional "friends" display work for the "wants friends" contingent?
Maybe it would. I want a way to keep up with my friends, and it would be very nice to add more if I want. Call friends what you may, they are important to many of us. Friends, to me, are different from mere subscribers. I don't even know all my subscribers, and I don't want all of my subscribers in my Friends list.
I do wish people (not anyone in particular) would please stop bringing up Facebook and Twitter. I tried both of them, and they were huge Fails for me. Twitter is just asine, in my humble opinion, and Facebook brought out old people I had broken ties with years ago. I finally had to delete my account to escape from them.
I am disappointed that I was lead to believe this was not a done deal. I have wasted a lot of my time, and my time is valuable, if only to me.
I’m sad
-
Inappropriate?Right On DAngel!
The problem is that the SU leadership is a monolithic community that does not encourage creative thinking or tolerate dissent and therefore is not open to considering other points of view so they make decisions based upon illusion rather than reality. I'm quite confident that this horrendous new version will go the way of Microsoft Vista and those of us who remain will eventually have our friends back but will no apology from SU.
-
Inappropriate?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
-
Inappropriate?XineAnn Said: Would an optional "friends" display work for the "wants friends" contingent?
It would work for me just fine. The ability to make "Folders" or "Lists" that each user could create for their own personal use...name it Friends, Sci-Fi Geeks, Fantasy Lovers, whatever warm fuzzy name you want...anything so that we each can have a quick visual reference to those we hold dear on SU.
I’m stick sticking my tongue out....
1 person says
this answers the question
3 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
A system for categorizing other stumblers? Good idea. But you could also apply a tag to each stumbler with those categories in the meantime. I have one for stumblers on su who write poetry.
-
!?!!!?! Going to your tag cloud to look for examples....while I still can.....
-
I tried looking for that tag on V4. There's no effective way to make use of it except to go back to V3 :(
-
Inappropriate?Foreignergrl, we just do not agree on this issue. Repeating yourself over and over is not going to make us that want friends not want them. I really wish people would stop with the Facebook and Twitter. If you read my post you would know they are giant FAILs with me. Myspace is for teenagers, and does not appeal to me, either. I came here for a reason. It was the best of both worlds. Good sites and good friends.
A friend to me is different than a mere subscriber. I guess I can repeat myself over and over again too, until somebody hears me. A friend is way different than a mere subscriber. Not all my friends are subscribers, and not all my subscribers are friends. Friends were encouraged when I came to SU and I picked mine carefully. I have friends that are not even mutuals. Don't you have friends that don't have the same interests as you? I do. We share stories of pain and give support to each other when things are going wrong. Friendships were encouraged when I came here, and now to say we cannot have them is blatantly unfair. I do not care about showing them off either. Saying that is a huge insult to the people that care about being friends in the true sense of the word.
.
I am glad you are happy Foreignergrl. That makes me happy. I just want to be happy, too, without taking away one little bit of your happiness. :))
Maybe what XineAnn suggested Tea elaborated on will be a good option. It sounds reasonable and easy enough for the developers to do. I do not want to count on a script "maybe" being able to do what we want. That is a big "maybe". I've installed some scripts that did not work for me for whatever reason.
I’m sad
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Very well articulated DAngel799! Don't know if it'll be a week, a month or a year but SU will ultimately relent and do the right thing..........for themselves, which is to give us back our friends. The longer they take the harder and more expensive it will be for them but SU can't survive without doing this and I believe they are starting to understand the foolishness of their decision.
I’m confident
-
Inappropriate?Ah... that is correct. Im the one repeating myself. Not the finicky "I want friends, I want friends, I want friends" crowd. Not at all. And though I have been repeating myself, I did take time to read the posts. All 500 of them. You want friends, and believe me, I heard you. All 500 times. But dont worry, you are not repeating yourself. :))
Funny though, except for saying that you dont want to rely on a script, with which I can understand and even agree, none of the points raised by me were addressed. You are talking, I suppose, about personal friends you have made here. Why would you need a list to remind you who your friends are? Shouldnt. But if you do, they are all under the drop down share button on your toolbar. And how does the new system prevent you from making new friends?
As for the list, and in case you all havent read it, I will quote Eric Goldberg, one of SU developers who has said 12 days ago:
===============================
"Not that I really like creating more work for myself, but I would say that I agree with karolinger and sebastian's points: a list of who can direct-share to you, and a similar control over who can PM you. The former for obvious management reasons, and the latter for anti-harassment. :)"
===============================
Yes, he did include the smiley, and hopefully, he is talking about a private list.
Unfortunately, whether it pleases the thread participants or not, SU is about content, not friendship. Friendships do develop, as a result of being part of a community, sharing interests or personal experiences, and that is a wonderful thing. But that is not the primary purpose of SU. That is why we mention myspace, and facebook. Adding the "friends" feature last year attracted this social network mentality, to the extreme that content was being totally ignored. Stumblers would get dozens of friends requests from strangers and almost no subscriptions, which obviously meant, the requesters were not interested in the content of pages, they wanted to jack up their numbers, either out of naiveté or for spamming purposes.
Yet, to be fair, I am here only since early 2008 (V2, V3, and now V4), so I could be wrong, but content base was what I was led to believe SU was all about. And to clarify: I dont have anything against friends, I love mine. Im against the friends feature, and all the drama and confusion it brought with it. Im against a public list of people we can share pages with, not against the list itself, which if private, is totally indifferent to me.
I’m still happy
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?But when you think about it, what exactly is being taken away? The very essence of SU as I have known it since I have been here. Friends were encouraged, but I was not a friend collector for the sake of having friends.
1. If you are talking about friends in the conventional sense, sure you dont need a list to remind you who your friends are?
Of course not, silly.
Answered. I want my friends all together in a list to PM or whatever I please. I want to be able to add and take away from the list at my pleasure.
2. How is it that the new version will keep you from making new friends?
It is not as friendly, and you cannot make a friend request. I can live with that, but the new people will have a harder time in my opinion. I am entitled to one are I not?
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?
That is not what I am talking about, and you should know that if you have read all my posts.
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.
Not a question.
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.
I'd rather do it now, and this was not a question.
Now all your finicky questions were answered, weren't they? lol :))
I’m peeved, but amused
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?SU is about friendship NOT content, period.
I understand that they like to say that SU is about content, not friendship but that is a Marketing gimmick which has worked in fooling some Stumblers into believing they are somehow magically receiving websites they couldn't get anywhere and everywhere else. Of course the truth is that these websites are available to everyone on the web and you can find them by entering keywords into a search engine like www.google.com. There is no secret algorithm discovered by SU to find wondrous content, SU is just a cool place to build cooler websites which you can share with cool friends you make here who appreciate the content of your site. The reason SU eliminated friends was so they could have you invite friends from outside SU which will help them build more revenue through advertising. Thank goodness most of us were wise to this and didn't fall for it. Expect friends to be back before old SU is even gone.
I’m Just peachy thanks
1 person says
this answers the question
11 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
No that's not why they changed the friends term, because that feature has been allowed since I joined in 2005...and for the millionth time they didn't eliminate friends, they just changed the name. Everything you could do with 'Friends' before you can now do wit Mutual Subscriptions+Shares. Nothing has changed. I still communicate with all my Friends from V3. Stop griping and just adjust. Everything is fine.
-
Heeey! How did Will get his own unique functioning SU? While the rest of us have had our friends folded into a mix of one way and mutual shares, he claims to have a special folder for just mutual shares. Either that or you're wrong.
-
It's called the share button on your toolbar. I'm not wrong. The only thing that has changed is your mutual subscriptions+shares are mixed in with your subscriptions now on your subscriptions page. NOTHING else has changed. Please stop fuming about this. Seriously....
-
This comment was removed on 10/11/09.
see the change log -
No if you look at the topics that are actually productive, you'll see I have favoured a separate section for Mutual Subscriptions+shares or a 'Filter by' option. But since you've never taken that time you wouldn't know that. Good day.
-
But of course that doesn't solve the problem. Oh, I forgot, you don't understand the problem as that would require being open minded with a side of empathy for others.
-
I'm sorry if I can't empathize with people complaining about a name change. It's just a word noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooothing has changed.
-
Not even a gray area. You are WRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
-
So explain to me what functionality have you lost? Besides the name 'Friends' and lumping them in with Subscriptions that couldn't be alleviated by a 'filter by "Friends" ' option.
-
This comment was removed on 10/13/09.
see the change log -
I give up, I'm not going to be able to make it clear to you that nothing has changed except the wording.
-
Inappropriate?"having discussed this extensively with management I have discovered it is YOU who will soon be fuming as they have realized SU doesn't work in the new format and are bringing back friends" ... That statement is not presented as a joke and its either factually correct or its not. If it is (which I seriously doubt) then we would all need to have it confirmed by SU staff. If its not then it is extremely misleading and will add to the present concern and uncertainty, in which case I'd suggest its withdrawn or deleted by the moderators. When some people are demonstrably having difficulty accepting the new interface its really not helpful to try to ratchet up the tension. Lets keep it sensible please.
-
Inappropriate?Something HAS changed
yes you won't really lose your friends BUT
my friends with whom I do NOT want to share subscriptions will get my subscriptions and I will get theirs unless we de-subscribe. I would be more than happy with a private friends list.
I liked the fact that "friends" allowed us to acknowledge relationships with people with whom we had little in common -- without forcing us to see their (ahhhemmm) strange political ideas on a regular basis. It allowed me to expand my horizons.
I freely admit that the word/function was abused and confusing but clearly so is the change, and it is a loss of a function I used.
I’m irritated
1 person says
this answers the question
4 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I agree with you alice but Will says we're wrong so I guess he knows better.
-
Well thanks for clarifying why you are mad, Grateful either couldn't or refused. However, you did position a solution, which in reality is exactly the same as V3's solution: Make sure you aren't subscribed to them.
-
As you and I both know alice, Will's "solution" is NOT a solution since in the new SU, not subscribing means our would be friends will not be visible anywhere, they'll have vanished. Sorry he keeps wasting your time by talking in circles. I know it's very annoying.
-
Yep it means I will lose contact with my friends -- for my subscriptions no problem all is well, but for friends (who by the way will almost certainly cease to be friends if we are mutual subscribers ) they will simply slip away -- these are people I met at SU and people I do indeed care about -- despite our differences. That was what was special about SU allowing you to meet people from all over the globe with wild and crazy opinions and to get to know them and develop friendships.
In the olden days before "friends" many of us wanted a way to track these people (as has been mentioned earlier in this thread) -- one of the ways some of us did this was to thumb a person up which would put their avatar on your blog. It kinda worked, but when you have 10,000 favourites it becomes more difficult. -
Inappropriate?Exactly, Ellie, I couldnt agree more.
We definitely should stay focused on the issues. All changes cause anxiety and confusion. This is really not needed here.
@Dangel: my points arent finicky. Im sure we are all seeing which part of the argument is finicky here. I care about SU and about my friends the same way you do. We just see things differently.
Absolutely nothing has changed in terms of making friends, and no functionality has been lost. Both parties can talk through PM's, check the magic box and (bam!) they are friends. Only SU wont call it friends anymore.
What you are experiencing now, is what happened to older members when the friends system was introduced last year. It was total chaos, but we adjusted. Some more grudgingly than others.
------------------------------------
I read here somewhere that the developers have come to the conclusion that the friends feature being introduced last year was a mistake. If that has changed, which I very much doubt, I would like to be informed as well.
I’m happier by the minute
2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
The Friends feature wasn't introduced last year. I've been here for 4 years and it's always been here for me. What WAS introduced last year was the horrible subscriber system which they are keeping and has been the cause of most of the problems and therefore the problems will continue but without the benefits friends gave us..
-
They just changed "fans" to "subscribers" and got rid of the "mutual friends" function. Then they made something new called "friends" which was separate from "fans".
Subscribers with the tickbox on gives you exactly the functionality you had with the "fans/mutual friends" nomenclature. -
Inappropriate?@alice ..its a tricky one. Shares was the only actual function associated with the 'friend' category. You could equally argue, and some did, that it should have been available to mutual subscribers (because havinig established mutual tastes in content thats what they'd be most likely to share). Neither way fits 100% of all cases.
Sharings now associated with mutual subscription (as an option) and I'm dead against keeping a functionless 'friend' category for all of the reasons I've given before which I wont bore anyone with again.
But if having a totally *private* list of two-way mutuals and/or a totally *private* 'best-buddy' list you could add to or delete from at will (no-one would know they were on it .. it'd just be to help you organise your own contacts) .. if either of those would help anyone without involving the need for any public listing of 'friends' or 'mutuals' or having a separate 'friend category' then I certainly wouldn't be against it.
1 person says
this answers the question
3 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
What Ellie said. If you want to be all lovie-dovie with your friends with no usefulness, add them on facebook/myspace/twitter. It's 2009 if you can't manage friends on multiple social networks you got a problem.
-
Finally we agree on something Will! When SU keeps the friends option as it currently is in old SU, if you can't deal with that, YOU'VE got a problem. Maybe you should use Twitter as it's very basic stuff and you should be able to grasp it. Best thing about Twitter for you is that there are no friends to worry you. I understand, you feel like you're back in high school when you were always picked last but without the friends option on Twitter you should be okay as much as that is possible. Good luck with all that.
-
What Ellie and Will said, me third and etc...
In fact, about what Ellie said, I never understood this to start with. If you subscribe to somebody, it means you have direct interest in their stumbles, so you would think the most logic thing would be to allow mutuals to share, with an opt out check box, instead of an opt in.
As for friends who dont want to mutually subscribe, personally, I will never get this. Unless they are friending to jack up numbers, for politeness (im guilty of that), or in hopes that the friend cares so much about them that will find special stumbles just for them... I really dont get it. Why should I share stumbles with people who dont share my interests? On the other hand, I have seen very smart people defending it, and it is a bit of a gray area, so I give it the benefit of the doubt.
I wouldnt complain about a list for organizational purposes, and might even welcome it, as long as it is totally private. -
Inappropriate?Friends are people you care about, have met in forums, have debated or agreed with -- talk with occasionally, exchange pms with, people who know you like cats or don't ... -- most of my subscribers and even the people with mutual subscriptions I have never talked to -- they aren't my friends, they are just people with interesting blogs and or who seem to come upon interesting sites. I might or might not actually want to be friends with them.
I’m bored
2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
You have given me an idea. I think I was go through and tag my current friends: cat-friends, poetry-friends, jazz-friends. Then I can use the Morning coffee add-on to open the tag page. I still have tags, right?
-
Don't forget the cat-hating-friends! (I might be hard pressed to be politic with some of my "friend" tags.)
-
Inappropriate?The friend thing is an overloaded term and therein lies the problem. In recent days, I've "unfriended" people I never talked to based on their stumbles. I didn't unsubscribe them, yet each and every one of them came to my page and unsubscribed me. Punishing me, I guess. But it's honest, they *aren't* interested in what I post. And can you blame them? How many people like cats and poetry astronomy and jazz all in one swoop?
This occurred with at least two of those sensitive poet types, and an SEO "maven" who wanted one-on-one New SU help and when I directed him to the post that says where to get help *still* didn't read it and told me he'd already read that SEO review. Oh, and one of the post pretty bodies girls.
What they actually wanted was to market their pages by appearing in my "Is subscribed to list" which, as I've pointed out before gives priority to "friends" over actual subscriptions so that people I am friends with but do not subscribe show in the "Is subscribed to" list.
When SU switches to subscriptions over "friends", I expect my subscriber count to plummet. And that's fine. It's a big step toward authenticity.
I am amazed at the hatred and venom brought up in this thread. I was stumbled "Do you HATE the New SU?" over and over and what is that about? How is that constructive?
I *wish* SU had a different development methodology than it does. I *wish* features were Beta tested and integrated in a way that wasn't such culture shock on the other end. But they've always done it this way and I don't see that changing. And there's something to be said for letting all the wailing be done with in one fell swoop.
I’m hopeless that this wonderful medium looks more and more like the "core" forums.
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Except it is harder to find threads and somehow more immediate, and of course you can't swing by SU pages -- which may or may not be a good thing. (And then the horrible invitation of just being able to respond to any post! Just asking for trouble from the likes of me... I had best get on with real life.)
I don't expect any change is subscriptions (unless I throw in the towel) but then I added only a few "friends" -- I fiendishly left the people I had never even seen to stew in the friend request bin. -
Inappropriate?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
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Don't count on it. I'd love to see the poll numbers. I'll bet 85% prefer the current friend system. This new unfriendly SU feels more like Twitter and IMHO, ten years from now there will be no Twitter or SU unless they wise up and keep it a social experience. Now might be the time for a stock split into 2 separate SU's one for socializing and building websites, the other for Googling with no friends to get in the way of searching for new content.
-
Inappropriate?I'll take that bet. I'll bet the silent majority will just adjust and get on with it because it's just a damn interface and they don't want to make it their life's work to complain about it or pull imaginary percentages out of their bodily orifices.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Just because the silent majority may adjust doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer the friends way if asked. It's easy for some to poo poo the percentages when they're in no position to prove them wrong. Sure hope they're paying you for all the time and energy you're putting into SU and this topic in particular. I'd hate to think this is what some people choose to volunteer their time to when there are animals and children in need of their time.
-
-
Inappropriate?No position to prove the percentages wrong? You made them up! I can't prove that elephants don't fly either. Happily, I don't have to.
Here's how logic works: You make a claim, you provide evidence to back up a claim. It's not: You make a claim and then dare everyone else to prove you wrong.
But you're right. This is a core forum in sheep's clothing. You forgot the jobless, and the starving children in India.1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I can easily prove elephants don't fly. If they could, you'd be able to watch them on YouTube right this second but you can't, therefore elephants can't fly, fact!.
-
Inappropriate?You frighten me.
-
Inappropriate?XineAnn, That petition you were stumbled has nothing to do with this thread. It concerned a product, not a person. I do hate the new SU with no friends. I do not hate anybody though, and I respect other points of view. I think that some people are ganging up on others here in this thread though. When you have 4 people going at one or two people it gets overwhelming to me, anyway. I just had to leave earlier. I did feel overwhelmed by the sheer number of people arguing all at one time with each other. Ganged up on is a phrase that comes to mind, too..
Foreignergrl said:
Ah... that is correct. Im the one repeating myself. Not the finicky "I want friends, I want friends, I want friends" crowd. Not at all. And though I have been repeating myself, I did take time to read the posts. All 500 of them. You want friends, and believe me, I heard you. All 500 times. But dont worry, you are not repeating yourself. :))
I called your questions finicky because you called what I was saying finicky. I'm not even going to say I didn't make 500 posts because that would sound childish, and I am an adult. Me:Did not You: Did, too. NanananaBooBoo
This is silly and getting us absolutely nowhere.
Can't we have a conversation without name calling and sarcasm?? We are all repeating ourselves over and over, so we are all guilty on that count. I've heard sarcasm from everybody today.
I do not want anybody to agree with me or to say I am right. I just want to know that my opinion is heard and respected. I don''t want it belittled or to be told what I think is finicky or stupid. I want us all to work toward a solution and not to fight. We are not out in the core forums, and I started this thread so it is my thread in a certain sense. I'd like both the people that agree with me, and the people that disagree with me to act in a civilized fashion toward one another with respect. Lets try to find answers and not find fault with each other. Forgive me for acting like a teacher, but I am a teacher and a librarian, and I feel like I am in a classroom.
XineAnn said:
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.
This may be useful. Well part of it anyway. Sigh. What do you mean by a folder visible only to each stumbler, like the inbox? That sounds sort of like what Tea was talking about earlier if I am not mistaken. I already said that might work. Where are the employees that are supposed to give input? We need answers, and all I see are questions. No wonder we are all so frustrated and cranky.
Well, I will see you all tomorrow I am sure.
Peace and love always...
I’m tired
-
Inappropriate?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
-
Inappropriate?I think much better to put all the mutual friends or mutual subscriptions in the drop down list in the inbox instead of subscription names so that we can easily reach our friends whom we shared sites. It could be the online friends on the upper part on the list. In this case the mutual friends will be invisible.
We will be out of drama and questions why we have this friend.
I also agree that our friends will always be our friend in V4, nothing will change on it. We can still chat with our friends through sharing sites.
I am not in favor of having friend request in V3 because as I observed so many stumblers were sending me friend request without subscribing my content. What's the purpose of having friends when we are not similar in interest and not even liking my stumbles.
I do agree that SU is all about content not with friendship. We can build friendship through sharing our interest. I started here by my self knowing that SU is a bookmarking site. Its totally different in facebook and twitter. If we all wanted a very close friends where we can chat then we can go to facebook. We are here to collect our favorite sites, discover and share our interest....not collecting friends....that's what I believe....
My number one reason why I like V4 is its simplicity. Before I invited my friends to join Stumbleupon but as soon as they saw the Home Page all they can say is " WHAT IS THIS ....WE CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT TO DO." Some signed up but later on they gave up their account coz they got annoyed with a lot of friend request from strangers. For them its so complicated, they didn't understand how it works....
Why we don't like to accept the new interface? Its for the best....
I’m hoping for the best
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I don't really consider SU a bookmarking site because it is so hard to find any particular old site -- even though I am not too bad at tagging. It is a GREAT site for learning new things and sharing them -- without the sharing (my blog, the forums and last and least sending shares) it would not be so addictive. I guess this means I think the friends I make here are as important as the content.
-
Inappropriate?I am going to accept the new interface; I don't really have a choice.
The only thing I want and I need are my friends. Even if I have to call "friends" something else I want a way to keep track of the people I care about here on SU. Like it or not I have become very attached to some of you here in a deeper way than just as a subscriber/subscription. Facebook and Twitter and any other place is not going to take SU's place.
I want SU to consider implementing the feature some of you offered up as a compromise. A private way to keep up with our "best buddies" or whatever you want to call them with a way to add more. Now is that an option? I think it might make a lot of people very happy, and that would be wonderful~for everybody to be satisfied. How about it?
I’m unsure
2 people say
this answers the question
2 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Private is fine with me -- my friends are not really anyone else's business and it would prevent the fake friendships of people just wanting links (previously I just ignored them). And it would acknowledge that in this community we can make friends with those whom we may have little in common.
-
Private is fine with me -- my friends are not really anyone else's business and it would prevent the fake friendships of people just wanting links (previously I just ignored them). And it would acknowledge that in this community we can make friends with those whom we may have little in common.
-
Inappropriate?.
.
Friends list isn't that bad.
.
.
1. I can "see" them rather than to "find" them(look for to and fro sign ) on subscriptions page .
2. Can see who among them are online at one place and in order of their recent SU activity .
3. Most don't have a 24' inch screen (I think most still are on 15 '-19' monitors) so cant see more than say 20 at a time in dropdown list under the share button .
.
.
.
.
Keeping friends and subscriber's relations independent .
.
.
V4 plans to make it a precondition that stumblers must be mutual subscribers before they can be friends on SU .
Subscribing means that I like what they like and want to receive their favorites in my stumbles . Mutual subscription makes it necessary that this relationship exists two way .
But I want to share sites with people I like talking to , even if I am not subscribed to them as it is not necessary that I want to see their favorites in my stumbles .
.
.
.
.
Also
.
.
1. Terminology of "friends" is not right .
There is not much distinction b/w friends and other relations on SU except ability to share ( with a message but that is optional )
It can be "stumblers I can share pages with " instead of "friends" or something more creative .
2. The Friends list can be made private , only visible to me .
3. V3 or V4 , I certainly don't need a list to remind me who my friends are .
4. Ability to share pages is one of the strengths of SU and anything that allows that automatically will not b good .
I should be able to choose who can send me pages , and it should not be automatic just because we are mutually subscribed ( like V2).
1 person says
this answers the question
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
You may not need a list , I do. Once you have 10-30 friends (no need for 200!) it is easy to miss if someone doesn't show up for a few days. If they are friends it is important to get back to people to check up on them, ask them if they are well etc. There are groups at SU tracking people who have disappeared for a reason -- people can just vanish. A friend's list is a way to combat this.
-
Inappropriate?Bring "FRIENDS" back before you cause undue stress and sadness for untold numbers of Stumblers. I've seen SU screw up time and time again when making changes but eliminating "FRIENDS" will go down as the worst marketing blunder since Diet Coke. Don't you have meetings with any smart Marketing people before making arbitrary decisions? It's taken me years to develop my SU friends and now I can't even find them to see their newest content and/or email them. There's oh so much more wrong like what am I supposed to do now, learn HTML instead of the easy edit function you used to have? Why make things more difficult? Defies all logic whatsoever. You make me sad. More social yet no friends, in the bizzaro world maybe. I really don't want to find "Friends" outside SU to force them onto the poorly thought out new su besides, they're my friends on Facebook, I don't need them here. I'd be too embarrassed to recommend SU.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Bring back "FRIENDS" Hurry!!!!!!.
I’m sad, mad
-
Inappropriate?I already made a tip about this, how to get your friends and old account back.
Why don't you read that? It's one or two simple steps.
I’m ballin
-
Inappropriate?I also sent you a PM telling you how to do it as well, so I hope that helps....
I’m gay
-
Inappropriate?what happened to friending?
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
friends vs. mutual subscriptions.
I’m sad
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
Sorry Roz, SU was becoming too much fun and too good a way too make friends from all over the world, so it was decided that the best way to slow down growth was to eliminate all the wonderful friends we've made over time and restrict us from making new friends.
-
Inappropriate?Sure hate losing the 'friends' feature. Otherwise, I really like the new lay-out .
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Friends.
I’m happy
-
Inappropriate?Would like my friends back
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Would like my friends back.
I’m sad
1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
CHAMP
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
