Skip to main content

View Diary: Facebook is Murdering Dogs (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  that's like arguing (11+ / 0-)

    if the yellow pages moves dog shelters from D for dog to S for shelters and one person can't find it, ATT is killing dogs.

    Or how about, since someone posted a diary here, they weren't spending that time writing about saving cats, therefore DK is killing cats.

    on the hyberbole scale of 1-10 this is the 11.

    •  Um, no. It's not. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      buddhistMonkey

      Your reasoning is deeply flawed. What you describe is passive, not active. When an active decision results in carnage, that's different than just being absent from a procedure.

      In your first example, people are given the opportunity to discover a workaround - to look under shelters instead of dogs. There is no such workaround available.

      How can you defend this?

      •  facebook tests new features (8+ / 0-)

        daily, always on active pages. they've tested every new feature from FB chat to timeline on live, active pages, always without the page owner's consent (because the person doesn't really own the page, they just manage it). Because the shelters don't own anything, FB has the right, which is stated in the terms of use, to change anything about the page it wants at any time without notice or consent.

        and the answer is simple, call the shelter, text someone, use twitter, use the newspaper, read all of the comments, set of the notifications for new messages.

        It's easy to defend, FB is not killing dogs. shelters are killing dogs. if people really want to adopt dogs, they can go to the shelters and get one. if they want to know about adoptable dogs, there are hundreds of websites out there to help them beyond facebook. if the shelter owners feel dismayed, they have phone and email records and twitter pages they can use and they can delete their facebook accounts.

      •  What did rescuers do before Facebook? What ever (8+ / 0-)

        the answer is to that question....go back to that.   Plan B doesn't work....try Plan A again or develop Plan C.  

        Facebook is not a dog rescue operation....they never claimed to be one.  

         So if you are using it as such or to help your own particular venture and they change their own model to where it no longer helps you....then move on to something else.

      •  Yes, it is (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ebohlman, Trobone

        FB is not owned by the people who use it to post or not to post. You are not entitled to it. So

        There are lots of people who do not want to see the pictures of abused animals in their timeline. They can't actually do anything about it and it's disturbing and frustrating and angering.

        We are just people, most of us middle class or poor, who do not have the time or the finances to address every cause that someone thinks we should. It's simply not possible. Some of us are just trying desperately to pay the rent and still be able to buy their blood pressure medicine or get their child a warm coat for winter.

        And I love dogs, more than people. And other people who do also- it tears us apart that we can't do anything about it.

        O great creator of being grant us one more hour to perform our art and perfect our lives. ::: Jim Morrison :::

        by Kevanlove on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 02:40:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yellow pages (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FrugalGranny, Wee Mama, Calamity Jean

      It would be more like randomizing the yellow pages and being shocked to discover that it makes it pretty much useless.

      I'm baffled that anyone would think that randomizing comments would be something useful, but I agree that saying Facebook is murdering dogs is hyperbole.

      The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

      by A Citizen on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 01:55:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And if the Yellow Pages randomized entries... (4+ / 0-)

        ...how long would people keep using it?

        How long would companies keep paying to advertise in it, after frustrated users stopped using it?

        People would "let their fingers do the walking" to someone else's directory book—and the advertisers would follow them.

        "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist." --Dom Helder Camara, archbishop of Recife

        by JamesGG on Mon Dec 03, 2012 at 01:58:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  odds are it's not randomized (0+ / 0-)

        it's in some order based on some calculation that a FB employee came up with.

        how FB comes up with and tests changes is really amazing. there are several articles about it. pretty much they all work on things they want to try, and if they get the green light it goes live on a limited about of pages the next day to see how it works.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site