BS: Let's ditch Facebook

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 10:38 AM

Armies of moderators? Mudcat has what...several hundred members,of which a much smaller number are regulars.
FB has hundreds of millions in countries all over the world. Thus, their primary 'mod' is a program to catch a chosen list of no-nos. Even the appeal process is limited, and FB even has a "open a new account" button which lets banned people back in under a new name.

   FB is not a site that can BE fairly moderated. All they can do is change a very complex algorithm.... one that doesn't interfere with their advertising too much.... and they couldn't run such a huge site without selling ads. You take your choice... and like Senoufou says, it can be a great resource for some.

   There is simply NOTHING like FB. One can limit who sees their posts...up to a point. But some 'friends of friend' can intrude. It's like pubs in different parts of town.... some have nicer clientele than others. You get 'mostly' what you came for.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 10:36 AM

how refeshing to see a modern day Don Quxote, and who is Sancho ,SOMEONE from linc0lnshire?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 10:31 AM

People set up a facebook page. They can then decide if they want to moderate it or not.

People decide to set up a site (not on facebook), let us call it mudcat for example. They can decide to moderate it as they so wish. Would they be responsible for the content or would it be the hosting site?

Do you imagine that all the hosting sites monitor all the pages set up by the users? I doubt it very much.

Why do you think facebook should be treated differently?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 10:11 AM

So how is this website "policed," Raindog? (That's rhetorical, if you don't mind...). I don't equate moderation with policing. As I've said, Facebook can well afford to have armies of moderators. There's the option of premoderating posts and there's the option of swift moderation of everything that can be seen by the general public. Even arbitrary is good. As I've said before, if your bad stuff is swiftly removed, your motivation for posting more bad stuff is reduced. There is no will to go even tiny distances along those paths, though, is there? Remind me, what were the profits for the last quarter?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 09:12 AM

But it's not just facebook is it? You can find the same sort of stuff all over the place. The fact that websites are accessible worldwide, it does make it harder to police them. What is illegal here might not be illegal elsewhere.

Who is to police it?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 08:35 AM

I'm not shouting, Doug, and if you're not wanting to listen then good for you. If most people feel that way, the thread will fizzle. I'm fine with that too.

I put my money into banks rather than under the mattress. I can earnestly search around for the most "ethical" bank but that's not easy unless you're prepared to take ethical claims at face value, which I'm not. Likewise with Teachers' Pensions. I can't do much about that. Islamic banks refuse to invest in gambling, tobacco and alcohol businesses, but they are Sharia-compliant (anyone can invest in them, not just Muslims, and returns are very competitive). Hmm. Tough, innit. I can't check the ethical credentials of everything I buy in Morrisons and I know that many things I buy would fall short. Coffee beans, chocolate, almonds, avocados, bananas, flowers from Kenya, you name it...

Life is full of choices but I'm no earth-mother and I definitely make some bad choices from an ethical point of view. Businesses are excellent at concealing their dubious ethics. Facebook's dubious ethics stare us right in the face. "I use it even though I know it does a lot of harm" is at least honest. I'm not so sure about "I use it but only in a circumscribed way." You're contributing to the upkeep of Facebook just as much as the most avid anti-vaxxer! Great as long as you admit it. I suppose we all adjust our morals to suit our convenience....

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 08:02 AM

When did I mention censorship, Raindog?

I've subscribed to several forums over 20 years and have cheerfully accepted with every one of them that they are not democracies, that it wasn't I who did all the work setting them up/paid for them, and that the moderators have a perfect right to decide what stays and what goes, whether I agree or not. I sign up to that type of transaction knowing that some stuff of mine may well get removed. To me, that's not censorship. In the House Of Commons, for all its yah-boo rough-and-tumble, you will be severely sanctioned if you threaten another member or call them a liar. I don't call that censorship either. Ultimately, rules governing the House and this forum are there to provide a constructive ethos for discussion and, importantly, to keep people safe. Facebook, to a very large degree, lacks these controls, and the upshot has been a good deal of abusive, bullying and threatening behaviour, resulting in a massive threat to the mental health of many thousands of people, not to speak of the widespread peddling of misinformation about vaccines, bogus remedies for Covid-19 and hoax theories. I'm simply bemoaning the fact that Facebook is not properly controlled. Censorship is the deprivation of free speech. Responsible moderation on public websites is not the same thing. That is severely lacking on Facebook and that in itself threatens freedom for millions of people.

Sure, Dave, there are lots of things in life you can aim your criticisms at. Can't deny that. But we do have individual choices. As I keep saying, a few years ago before Facebook existed we all sort of went around happily not knowing that we "needed" it. Well I don't need it, yet that hasn't turned me into a recluse...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 07:54 AM

You are shouting into the wind, Steve. Not many can hear you and even fewer want to listen.

DC

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:26 AM

Aye, fairy nuff, Steve. I just reasoned that there are so many things that cause problems that we all accept (Alcohol consumption for instance) that Faceache is pretty low on my list of priorities!

I shall bow out unless you want me to comment on anything in particular.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:24 AM

"I'll just say again: if you subscribe to Facebook you are helping to perpetuate a phenomenon that has caused a good deal of harm, especially to young people and especially in these times of conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers and the rest."

You can say much the same about the net/web in general. Where is your censorship going to end? Will you have people checking our emails and/or other messaging systems?

I have never been a member of facebook but i do read some public facebook pages. Most clubs, pubs and other venues use facebook nowsdays. I read the posts on a local history facebook page. I can read all the posts and see all the pics but i cannot search it. I have thought of joining facebook in order to be able to search that page but it is moderated quite strictly. They do not accept new members unless they have a facebook profile which indicates that they also belong to other groups. Catch 22 for me but it does stop bots/spammers joining the page.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:02 AM

Well I do eat lobsters, Dick (I prefer crab, actually), and, like most people, have found myself accidentally landing on Facebook when doing something else (such as clicking around Yeo Valley's website, for example, or looking up a particular person of note), and I looked around some pages at someone else's behest (on their iPad) when someone very dear to us died unexpectedly, generating a big flurry of tributes. That sort of thing. So I'm familiar enough with its setup, Dick, but haven't felt the urge to "try" it.

As I said, to me it's one of those things that we didn't have until a few years ago and didn't know we needed. Many moons ago I flirted with Friends Reunited until I gradually discovered that, for example, school pupils were able to post adverse comments about their teachers (I didn't see any about me, but I did stop looking as I found it all a bit distasteful, so who knows...).

I started this after a couple of comments on the Brit thread that it was perhaps not the place to discuss Facebook, but I'm not interested in starting a campaign, Dave. I will react to stuff I hear about Facebook, but I won't be gunning to be a Greta Thunberg. To end this post on a provocative note, I'll just say again: if you subscribe to Facebook you are helping to perpetuate a phenomenon that has caused a good deal of harm, especially to young people and especially in these times of conspiracy theorists, anti-vaxxers and the rest. Putting a ringfence around one's own transactions with Facebook isn't going to change that. It's up to individuals to decide whether they can live with that. I know I couldn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 04:41 AM

Steve reminds me of the people who will not eat lobsters because of how they are cooked alive, admirable, but they are not the people i would ask about the taste of a lobster.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 04:30 AM

I’m in the same camp as Dave, my audience is limited to family and Friends, and my Friends are limited to people I know personally or, as I’m still musically active, those who are musical contacts or other artists whom I admire and choose to ‘follow’.

I belong to several Groups - mostly music/local history - which are well-moderated. I ‘moderate’ my own threads on my own page, and posts which are, in my view, offensive are deleted and the poster is blocked - first strike, you’re out, no appeal.

I never post photos of children - mine or anyone else’s - and I never ‘Like’ or comment on photos of children posted by others. I’m always astonished at the number of proud, doting, gushing parents and grandparents who are more than happy to expose their perfect little angels’ images to theft and misuse by dark and unscrupulous elements on Social Media. And I never join in any of the silly ‘quiz’ threads designed to harvest data about individuals which way assist scrotes in internet scams and attacks.

I do, though, post photos of my dog. ;-)

And, like Dave, I would like a better-moderated FB, one where the vast profits it makes are put to making our world a better place but, until that happens, or something better comes along in its place, it has to suffice. So, although I’m at times uneasy about FB, I’ll continue to use it, as carefully as I can.

I’ll follow this thread with interest…

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Senoufou
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 04:11 AM

Oh no, I love our Village Facebook! So handy, and I know most of the people on there. Gives notice of community events, happenings (escaped pigs etc), warnings about road closures, things for sale by residents and so on. If anyone should post something unpleasant (hardly ever happens) they get flamed immediately and shut up!
My only reservation is the number of very sad little videos from other parts of the world (Smile Train cleft lip children, animals in distress being saved from starvation, donkeys being ill-treated etc) But one doesn't need to click on them. I just scroll past hurriedly.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Mr Red
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 03:54 AM

Let's ditch Facebook

Too late, it is already in the gutter! 😏 But has its uses - & like prescription drugs, it depends on the dosage, and application.

I once took a friend to task on a xenophobic rant over Brexshit and his response was "well it's my opinion" which was not accurate - it was someone else's opinion he had shared. AND that is the problem with Fakebook.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 03:43 AM

Facebook is like the internet, a tool, it depends on the people who use it and how it is used
I find it puzzling that someone who does not use it wants to Boycott it, how can you know anything about it if you never visit the site , you do not have first hand experience of the site.
That is known as prejudging or prejudice.it reminds me of someone who once said to me Mudcat is a place i never go to.
I have opinions about this site, but they are informed because i visit the site

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 03:30 AM

Too late for me, Steve. I use it for mass communication with family and friends. My audience is limited to family and friends. I do not follow any links apart from those from family and friends. Any groups or comments I find offensive are instantly blocked. It works for me.

Yes, I know that there is bad stuff on there. I just avoid it in the same way that I avoid the nasty bits of real life. And, yes, I get the point about it making millions but where else can I share my joys, triumphs and frustrations to an audience of people I love and care about? I would love to see a better moderated version and the money they make go to good causes but it is still by far the best tool for my purposes.

I will not be joining you but good luck with the campaign anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 31 Oct 21 - 10:03 PM

I only relented and joined it with one of my more expendable email IDs,
merely to enter competitions for music equipment and software.
But I never log-in, or look there unless no other choice.

I actively resent disloyal people who split off from well established superior resourced old tech forums,
to set up cliquey facebook alternatives appropriating the same name..

It's happened to two of my favourite forums.

The other is now a ghost town through lack of visitors...

Subject: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Oct 21 - 09:25 PM

"And I agree with Dave - Facebook and it’s problems are a far wider issue than British politics, and really should be discussed in a separate thread."

A quote from BWM on the Brit thread there, echoed by others. So I'll bite.

I said this on that thread:

"This site is closely moderated [meaning Mudcat], and the mods do a pretty decent job of removing promptly any offensive, insulting or threatening material. By so doing promptly (a key attribute), it encourages us to know that trying to post stuff like that isn't worth the effort. Jeremy Keith polices his Session website closely and assiduously, and members know that it simply isn't worth trying to post nonsense. Dick Gaughan's former website, the same (good old Molly...) You call these social media sites, Dave, and I suppose they are in a way, though I don't generally class them as such meself. Compared to behemoths such as Facebook they are tiny. In a way, that makes my point about too big to fix. BWM highlights one aspect of that [basically, that opponents of Facebook are likely to be shat on from on high], and another aspect is that smaller is more beautiful and more fixable. It would take an army of moderators to police Facebook as effectively as here. Two points about that: first, Facebook can well afford an army of moderators, but has always preferred profit over people, and why spend your profits if you can get away with not doing? Second, an army of moderators keeping Facebook clean and safe would have the far-right and the conspiracy theorists, and all the other multifarious do-badders who use it, deprived of the mass audience they so easily exploit, ranting and raving about the denial of democracy and free speech. It's gone to far to fix, it's too big to fix and it won't be fixed. Maybe a mass revolt and a rapid bleeding away of its members voting with their feet will be the only way. There again, I think I may be in cloud-cuckoo land..."

I think that Facebook, in spite of apologist attitudes that "it helps one to keep in touch with friends and family," etc., is a force for evil. It nakedly puts money-making above the safety and security of ordinary people. It propagates, unmoderated, conspiracy theories, misinformation and hate speech that all damage people who are vulnerable.

I've never subscribed to Facebook. On one occasion several years ago, a visitor from New Zealand to our house took photos of us all in the house. Grand, no problem. A few minutes later she was fiddling with her iPhone very quietly and I asked her what she was doing. Well, she was posting the photos on to her Facebook account. She was amazed and surprised when I asked her to not do that. I mean, why should I have had to explain to her that I didn't want photos of me to be posted in a place that I don't subscribe to? She is not an arrogant person at all, but the sheer arrogance of her assuming that she could airily do that without asking... Is that what Facebook does to people? I mean, how many photos and how much stuff about me is up there that I don't know about? Do I really have to sign up in order to find out and monitor it?

So I think, let's ditch Facebook. Let's not make the arseholes who run it, who don't give a stuff about us as long as they can carry on making their billions, any richer from now on. The damage they've done far outweighs, in m'humble, any "good" they've done. Ten or fifteen years ago you didn't know that you needed Facebook, and there's no reason to think that you need it any more than that now.