BS: Let's ditch Facebook

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 21 - 01:21 PM

Thing is, Dick, I must emphasise that that information comes from Avaaz, which is a pressure group (one that I respect, otherwise I wouldn't have posted that). I haven't checked it all though I suppose it is all checkable. Just a caveat...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 21 - 01:09 PM

Steve, thanks for that info about facebook

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 09 Nov 21 - 06:07 AM

There's always been mega profits to be made from a destabilised world of conflicts..

Divide and rule, and get more powerful and richer...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Nov 21 - 06:01 AM

I receive emails from Avaaz about their campaigns. I got one this morning from Anneke Kooijmans about Facebook.

She talks about human traffickers using Facebook to lure women into sexual slavery. How Facebook knew that it was being used to incite violence against minorities.

How Facebook permits climate denialism to millions, everywhere.

How, in Myanmar, the military used Facebook as a tool for ethnic cleansing and spreading hatred that fuelled a bloodbath. How, in Palestine and Israel, viral lies are further inflaming the conflict, and how active climate denialism online is already trying to overshadow the climate emergency negotiations in Glasgow.

And we've covered conspiracy theories and anti-vax campaigns...

Almost the worst aspect of all this is that Facebook knows that all this goes on.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 09 Nov 21 - 04:36 AM

yes, it is bad for a lot of people.
i cannot understand the people who put up their meals on it.
even more stupid are the people who post they are going on holiday. ideal humting for any burglars
but all internet sites, to some extent cannot or do not eradicate bullying.
i remember one site where someone suggested that my fingers be chopped off, that was just as bad as any facebook abuse, the owner of the site did nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 08:26 PM

There are lots of posts here of the sentiment that "I enjoy it, it keeps me in touch, I avoid the harm, I can judge for myself and ignore the bad stuff..."

Thing is, as pfr points out, not everyone can keep themselves safe on Facebook. Not everyone can think for themselves sufficiently to avoid the harm. Millions of people are refusing the vaccine because of Facebook and its ilk. Vicious campaigns, such as the ones being carried on outside school gates to harass young people into refusing the vaccine... Millions of people hoodwinked by conspiracy theories...Suicide cults... and, every time, the powers-that-should-be at Facebook are way behind the curve and a good deal of damage is done before remedies are put in place (and note the reluctance to put them in place...). There is a massive mental ill-health issue burgeoning among young people especially. There's bullying, there's body-image issues, there's sexual harassment...and those suicide cults...

Lots of aspects of life contain both good and bad. No getting away from that. The thing about Facebook is that membership is entirely voluntary. A few years ago we didn't know we needed it. It may be good for you but it's bad for a lot of people (and it's harsh and unfeeling to just tell them to get a grip, like you've done...), and there's a don't-care attitude afoot among the Facebook top dogs. OK, so let's not ditch Facebook, but let's at least acknowledge that the organisation we are helping to perpetuate via our membership is doing a lot of harm. A lot. Maybe to people not as tough-minded as you. Be careful who you blame for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 06:23 PM

Tattie - those local useful functions are why I relented my indiference to social media and joined "Nextdoor" social network,
after being invited by a neighbour..

But even then neighbours chat and refer to activity on local facebook groups,
as if we are all supposed to be aware they exist - and follow them...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 06:01 PM

Oh, and before I forget, small locality Facebook groups have been enormously useful for buying and selling, finding recommendations for local tradespeople, free cycling unwanted but serviceable items, reuniting all sorts of lost items with their rightful owners -anything from lost house or car keys, to items of jewellery, straying pets, recruiting volunteers… you name it….!

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Tattie Bogle
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 05:53 PM

If Facebook doesn’t float your boat, you don’t have to use it. Plenty of us do enjoy using it, for communicating with friends and family, and, like others, I use it for advertising the activities of various music organisations I’m involved with, as well as keeping an email list active for those members and followers who don’t have Facebook accounts.
If I see something I disagree with, I can either post my considered opinion, ignore the post, block it, hide it or report it. It does not stop me thinking for myself.
For more private distribution of family photographs I am more likely these days to use our family WhatsApp group, so that they don’t end up going to all my “friends of friends”, although you can create more selective small groups within Facebook too.
And if you want to ask a question or log a complaint with some company that has given you bad service, they all now have Facebook pages and Messenger: often far more effective than phone calls, emails or even letters of complaint for getting some positive action.
So let’s not ditch Facebook: you shun it if you wish. I’ll carry on using it, thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 11:43 AM

Like many other folks with mental health problems, my sister was an addicted and compulsive user of social media..

She had it within her power to post all kinds of vengeful and malicious trolling
about ayone or anything she perceived as the slightest bit disrespectful to her..

Sites like facebook too easily ecourage and indulge such damaged and damaging people...

My wife is a teacher, we will never normally know what local facebook users post, good or bad, about her behind her back...???

It was quite a surprise these days to see a photocopied poster pinned on a street corner tree
accusing a local man of being an evil paedo..

Oh, the nostalgia it brought back for old fashioned communication technology...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: PHJim
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 10:50 AM

While Myspace was better for musicians, if I quit Facebook, I would want something to replace it.
Before Facebook, I would spend at least a day postering local towns to publicize a gig. Now one mention on Facebook almost guarantees a full or almost full house. That is my primary reason for being on Facebook. Most people at a show will say that they heard about it on Facebook or at least from someone who heard about it on Facebook.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Jack Campin
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 10:39 AM

Are there any alternatives to Facebook that provide similar services without all the seemingly attached BS?

Telegram, but I can't figure out how to find people or forums there. It does allow you to upload a fair range of media types without an account on an external service. And it works properly on my old phone, which Mudcat doesn't.

Reddit ought to help but its cult of anonymity is nuts.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 04:12 AM

Facebook is about advertising, as i run a festival i need to advertise

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: DaveRo
Date: 08 Nov 21 - 03:02 AM

It depends on what you mean by 'similar to facebook'. Facebook has several overlapping uses. For example:
1 - staying in contact with friends and family, posting pictures of your children or cats, which some people have said is all they do.
2 - announcing gigs at a folkclub, posting reports of gigs, maybe coments from those who attended (or maybe not allowing comments).
3 - promoting your political party, seeking reaction.

Facebook has built its business on linking those and many other functions together, to keep you 'engaged', find out as much as possible about you (and selling that data), and thus to drive advertising revenue - be that products, or political messages.

Decide what you value facebook for, and more importantly what you dislike about it or think is socially divisive about it. Then type 'alternatives to facebook' in your favourite (unbiased) search engine. Examine who owns or runs these services.

For #1 - staying in contact with friends and family - you then face the biggest problem - persuading your friends and family to use it.

I have relatives who are all 'on facebook'. When I tell them I'm not they're very surprised; they don't see anything wrong with it. Or maybe with their use if it.

My particular beef is with folkclubs, say, who decide they ought to have a facebook site, but don't set it as 'public' - maybe don't even know that's possible. They then allow their website to fall into disuse.

This, in yesterday's Guardian is insightful I thought:
Social media fuels narcissists’ worst desires, making reasoned debate near impossible

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Sol
Date: 07 Nov 21 - 08:51 PM

Are there any alternatives to Facebook that provide similar services without all the seemingly attached BS? Just wonderin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: leeneia
Date: 07 Nov 21 - 04:42 PM

A few years ago I decided to sign up for a FB account, and when I finished, FB put up a page that said "Welcome! Here are some people you may know!" And there were pictures of two of my friends and of three people I had never heard of. I immediately deleted the account.

Obviously FB had been keeping track of me when friends mentioned my name, even though I had never given them permission, had never had any kind of transaction with FB.

Now I have an account, but I only use it to check on concerts, etc. I never post anything, and my settings are as conservative as possible.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Mr Red
Date: 05 Nov 21 - 04:34 AM

perhaps the platform should be dismantled into smaller-size pieces ..." I can't even imagine what that would look like.

1) Instagram didn't start out as Schmukerberg spawn.

2) Libre is not core to his business, maybe he should ditch it anyway. As cash cows go this one has mastitis.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: leeneia
Date: 05 Nov 21 - 12:52 AM

I don't post on Facebook. I'll enter the site to check on something like a concert, but I won't type anything. My settings are as conservative as possible.

Recently I heard a talk by a retired FBI agent who explained step-by-step how an executive's innocent discussion of a canoe trip on Facebook led to the theft of a $250,000 payroll from his company. Never will I join Facebook.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Nov 21 - 07:19 PM

"Defeatist ring"...No, just not willing to go "jousting at windmills".
It's really not up to me to fight FB. There are people far more able and willing to take up the challenge... and some are already working at it. There have been recent changes and cancellations of accounts for various rule breaking.

As for "...perhaps the platform should be dismantled into smaller-size pieces ..." I can't even imagine what that would look like. It's not like making some financial conglomerate divest various pieces. It is one entity/algorithm with Zuckerberg holding the strings.

I am reminded of threads from several Mudcatters saying "Why doesn't the USA DO something about those ridiculous gun laws?"
I have spent far too many hours typing detailed reasons why it is so hard.
   As a couple have said above, FB has several virtues, and those who want to avoid the real crap can mostly do so.

No.. it's not a matter of being a defeatist, but rather being a pragmatic realist.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Mr Red
Date: 03 Nov 21 - 11:01 AM

Why do you think facebook should be treated differently?

Yes.

Fakebook is the biggest target. Get them to act like the publishers they are and their cousins will find if they don't step into line, they will be the next target.

Cars are dangerous weapons, and carry laws in their wake. Guns (at least in civilised societies) have laws attached. How dangerous is Fakebook ? Ask Putin, his uses thereof have been pretty devastating.
2016 & Jan 6 ring any bells? Try 2015.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Nov 21 - 09:34 AM

I have followed this with interest and looked up various facts about Faceache.

Thanks for the food for thought, Steve. All you say is true but... (You knew one of the was coming didn't you? :-) )

I will hold my nose and remain a member. I have already mentioned that I am only visible to family and friends. I do not follow anyone I do not know and, in future, I shall not follow any advertising, click bait or links that are unfamiliar to me. I shall also watch for anything cropping up that I think inappropriate and report it instantly.

Sorry, I know it isn't the whole hog but as I find it such a useful tool, I shall keep using it.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 03 Nov 21 - 06:46 AM

An instructive read on this topic seen from a UK perspective. The Guardian view on regulating social media: necessary but risky

"Big tech self-regulation is not working. But measures to curb online harm must be carefully thought through..."

(Published: 18:30 Friday, 29 October 2021)

Go thou and google now....

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 07:47 PM

"...given the way their platform works and the size of the membership..."

Well perhaps the platform should be dismantled into smaller-size pieces. If a country decides that one of its institutions is too big and too out-of-control, and causing real harm, then it's time to move in. Give it notice. Then, if and when necessary, take control over it. Either that will come one day or the membership will move on. That happens. There's a defeatist ring to your post, as in *shrug*, there's nothing we can do...

I've posted one account of the harm done by Facebook and its reluctance to put things right. You can find similar accounts all over the web. I'm not going to keep beating everyone around the head with more of them. Just one more time: Facebook couldn't exist without its members. It doesn't matter how you circumscribe, limit and keep private your own transaction with it. You matter to Facebook just as much as anyone else does, from its youngest child member right up to the worst hate-speechifiers, bullies, groomers, hoaxers, Trumpists and anti-vaxxers. As long as you know!

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 05:31 PM

Yes... I see that many people agree that FB "...failed to protect their users from Covid-19 and vaccine misinformation .."

That is 'true', but all I see is the flat statement. I'd love to see several experts opinion on how... and how much.. FB COULD do.

I did say they probably could do better, but given the way their platform works and the size of the membership, I am dubious about real success.

    They do have **significant** resources, but just throwing $$$ at it and hiring more moderators may never be enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 10:48 AM

From todays Guardian.

Facebook failing to protect users from Covid misinformation, says monitor

Dan Milmo Global technology editor

Misinformation and sceptical views about Covid-19 and vaccines has been allowed to spread on more than a dozen Facebook and Instagram accounts, pages and groups that together have gained 370,000 followers over the past year, according to a report.

The misinformation and promotion of vaccine hesitancy includes posts in Facebook groups claiming that children are being “murdered by the experimental jab they’re being pressured to take”, and an Instagram account promoting a documentary by Andrew Wakefield, one of the key figures in promoting discredited links between MMR inoculation and autism.

The 20 accounts, pages and groups have been tracked by NewsGuard, an organisation that monitors online misinformation. Since September last year NewsGuard has submitted regular reports to the World Health Organization, at the WHO’s request, flagging social media sites and other digital platforms that are spreading falsehoods about Covid-19.

In research published on Tuesday, NewsGuard said 20 of the sites that it had monitored over that period had gained a total of 372,670 followers. A full report containing the research has been sent to the WHO.

The NewsGuard research points to prominent sources of vaccine scepticism such as the Facebook pages of Robert F Kennedy Jr, a prominent anti-vaxxer, and Joseph Mercola, an alternative medicine doctor, as well as smaller sources such as the France Soir account on Instagram.

Kennedy was banned from Instagram over his vaccine stance in February but his Facebook page and Mercola’s Instagram account have gained more than 140,000 followers since February, according to NewsGuard. Mercola has said he has “every right to inform the public by sharing my medical research”.

Facebook came under pressure to ban Kennedy, the nephew of President John F Kennedy, in March when he released a documentary, Medical Racism, which has been accused of seeking to promote vaccine hesitancy among black Americans. Kennedy has said the film “empowers all Americans to demand the safest vaccines”.

Facebook and Instagram are both owned by Meta, the company that until a rebranding last week was known as Facebook.

Alex Cardier, the UK managing director for NewsGuard, said Facebook and Instagram were failing to protect their users from Covid-19 and vaccine misinformation despite having been warned “repeatedly”.

He said: “The company’s engagement-at-all-costs mantra means that viral and divisive sources of misinformation continue to flourish, despite warnings from NewsGuard and the clear danger posed to users. Facebook gave itself a new name but their promotion of misinformation remains the same.”

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 06:28 AM

Jeri posted "For some reason I don't understand, I don't get the negative stuff people can complain about. I have Adblock Plus, but still get some ads."

I look at 3 facebook sites on a regular basis. I am not a facebook member and they are public groups. I don't see any ads on them at all and i don't run any extra ad blocking add ons. Are the ads only shown to facebook members or can the owners of the public groups choose not to run ads?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 06:08 AM

"You seem to want to blame them for all the ills of the net/web."

Where does that come from? This is a thread specifically about Facebook. Just because I don't mention every other website that I don't like at the same time doesn't mean I want to give them a bye or even fail to refuse to use some of them. If you think I'm obsessed with Facebook just because I focus on it (in a thread about Facebook!), I could be thinking that you're obsessed with steering the thread away from it...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 05:42 AM

"Now if there was a social site for misanthropic hermits.."

Well bit of a contradiction in terms there pfr. There are a number of such sites, not all on facebook, but the majority are inactive due to the members dislike of each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 02 Nov 21 - 05:27 AM

I am not defending facebook. You seem to want to blame them for all the ills of the net/web. I am just pointing out that you can find all those sites you disaprove of all over the net/web. You seem to want to ignore that fact but then that is nothing new.

You don't like some of the things on the net/web yet you use that medium to express that view, supporting the big tech that spreads and profits from doing so. Feeling guilty? I doubt it very much.

I am not a member of facebook.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 11:14 PM

jeri
is partly right, TO SOME EXTENT the people are to blame, but that is only part of it, it is too big to moderate properly, it is about making money for Zuckerberg, he is not prepared to spend enough of his profit to have it moderated properly.
The Taliban are right, the worship of consumerism is evil, Zuckerberg is trying to encourage the worship of consumerism, so his company can profit, all he cares about is tht it makes a profit for him.
Face book might eventually destroy itself, but in the meantime its existence will have done both harm and good depending on how members use it. it is an uncontrolled phenomenon,

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 10:32 PM

My sister was an early adopter of the internet..

Around 1991 I was trying to get my head round why I should be arsed with it, and bother learning to use a computer...???

Why the f@ck would I ever be interested in endless excruciating pages devoted
to doting on cats and babies...!!!???

It took another 8 years before I realised there was music and naked ladies on the internet...

I still don't care much for social media, I prefer avoiding most people from my past..

..and I'm not too excited about meeting new 'friends'...

Now if there was a social site for misanthropic hermits..

.. oh, there is - it's called "switching your computer off"...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 09:42 PM

If taxpayers never had to pay for our policing costs, we wouldn't need the police. If fat people stopped eating pies and getting diabetes, taxpayers would pay far less for the NHS. Same thing if people were a bit more careful and didn't have road accidents. The taxpayer pays the extra policing costs for a lot of things you may or may not approve of. We paid the extra policing costs at the demo in 1979 at which my friend Blair Peach was murdered (by a policeman). We pay the policing costs for English Defence League demos as well as for The People's March For Jobs (I was on that one) and for anti-invasion of Iraq protests (ditto). We pay the policing costs for crowd control outside Premier League football grounds on match days and at big pop music gigs. We paid the policing costs for Trump's state visit. We pay the policing costs for royal weddings.

Incidentally, and slightly beside the point I suppose, in many cases the police are at work anyway on these occasions and the extra costs may be a lot less than you think. The BBC did a fact-check piece on this recently.

You are indulging in a fair bit of whataboutery in this thread in order to defend Facebook. That defending is fine by me as long you accept that you can't expect to pick and choose which bits of our society's endeavours you happen to disapprove of in order to make that whataboutery defence yet retain credibility. The thing is, we live in a democratic society in which we are free to dissent, demonstrate (including sitting down on roads, at least until that paragon of wisdom Priti Patel makes it illegal) and partake in activities you may disapprove of but which are entirely legal, do unwise yet legal things at times (my red wine habit might well put me in hospital for a liver transplant one day* - that'll cost you!) and generally act like fallible human beings. I don't want fat people to stop eating pies if they don't want to. I might demur at the thought of a sensationally-rich family getting us to pay for policing their weddings, etc., but it's not illegal, it's a democracy and I'm probably in a minority in thinking that anyway. I'd rather have things this way than live like they did in Mao's China, the Soviet Union or North Korea, no?

All very philosophical, but back to the FB fray, eh?

*I'm not that bad, honest...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 08:18 PM

Where did they get their ideas from? They should be prosecuted for breaking the law and maybe made to pay for the damage.

I wonder where the insulate britain protestors get their ideas... Still the tax payers will pay for all the extra policing costs, so that's ok then...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:39 PM

Early today, anti-vaxxers severely damaged, by slashing, the marquees at a vaccination centre at Mount Hawke here in Cornwall. The slogan they daubed was "No vax 4 kids."

I wonder where they get their ideas... Still, the NHS will pay for the damage, so that's OK then...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:13 PM

I'll agree with Steve - we don't need to step in dogshit every day
in order to warn other people how unpleasant it is...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 06:03 PM

What I meant, Jeri, is that it is wrong for anyone to throw back in my face that I don't get it because I'm not in it. What Facebook is doing is out there for everyone to know about, members or not. It's not a valid criticism. Most of the people I know and love are on Facebook. So I don't understand that particular attack. It sounds like a defensive reaction...driven by guilt?

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: The Sandman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 05:43 PM

a man i have known since 1978, this man cared and lokked after his invalid wife for many years, he was a decent human being and good singer, his sad death is far more important to me than facebook, facebook is a curates egg, it is only as good as its posters

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 05:31 PM

I don't disagree with a chunk of what Steve said. I don't know where he got "guilty" though.
For some reason I don't understand, I don't get the negative stuff people can complain about. I have Adblock Plus, but still get some ads. I get those stupid "Oh, poor [whomever] - it's so sad to see them go." I'm guilty of reporting fake "news" ads. I'm also pretty good at ignoring things I don't like. I don't buy the whole "Facebook makes kids feel bad about themselves" thing. What CAN'T? It's life. It's Facebook, and Instagram and it's high school. and people. Cruelty exists, but I don't know if the forum, whatever forum it is, can be blamed - as opposed to the people there. But I admit I might simply not be getting what others are.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 04:58 PM

But it's not just facebook is it?

Not sure what you have been looking at lately. Search for any subject you don't like and you will be directed to numerous non facebook sites.

Maybe it's the search engines you should be boycotting.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 04:30 PM

Of course it would be quite a task. But I'm not bothered that the private, invisible family-and-friends stuff is unmoderated. It's all the stuff that is available for unrestricted public viewing, including by children, especially by children, that bugs me. And it's not good enough to say that Facebook should respond more quickly to complaints. That's just throwing the ball back into the public court, cost-free. I'll tell you what's going to be "quite a task": cleaning up the mental ill-health mess and the burgeoning disease levels caused by the Facebook bullies, liars, manipulators, anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists. The taxpayers will pay for the attempts to alleviate all the suffering, no worries there. While the Facebook bigwigs sit on their billions-per-month profits unscathed. Facebook created its own monster and Facebook should pick up the whole of the tab for keeping it under control.

Bill, hundreds of millions of members generate hundreds of billions of dollars. The monitoring can be afforded and must be much better than it is. Nothing's perfect, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 03:19 PM

"Facebook has both the financial resources and the moral responsibility to do it a lot better"

Steve.. did you read my post from last night? FB 'could' do a little better, but as I said, it's mostly an algorithm. Hundreds of millions of FB members just can't be totally monitored. Here, several mods can see EVERYTHING and cope with most of it.

Moral responsibility on FB is secondary to profit.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Rain Dog
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 01:32 PM

But are you asking for all the net/web to be moderated?

You do seem to have it in for facebook. I imagine it would be quite a task for them to moderate all of their pages.

I do agree that facebook should respond more quickly to complaints about individual pages. Of course they are not alone in that. Plenty of other companies are slow to act on justified complaints.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 01:26 PM

Incidentally, I'm fine with people not using their real names. What I'm not fine with is people posting on a website where the people who own the website don't know who it is who's posting. Anonymity of that kind has resulted in huge abuses online. The owner of a forum should always know the real names and at least the emails of every poster. There's not one reason on earth why they shouldn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 01:18 PM

That is way too black and white, Jeri, but I suppose at least that "encouraging people to 'ditch it'" (accurate enough) is an advance on "policing" or "censoring." I called for moderation on Facebook, that's all, and Facebook has both the financial resources and the moral responsibility to do it a lot better. As I said before, just because I haven't signed up to it doesn't mean I'm clueless as to what goes on, and that accusation is just a way of throwing a protecting veil over one's, how shall I put it, er, guilt??

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: punkfolkrocker
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 01:13 PM

I get by comfortably on just being indifferent
to things that don't interest me..

So I can't be arsed actively protesting against, or boycotting social media
which I never use, if I can avoid it...

.. except the "Nextdoor" app, where neighbours invited me, and I have to use my real name..

It's good for a laugh reading local reactionaries moaning about petty things,
and useful foidentifying who in my area is a reasonable person, or a complete knob..

I just have to exercise self-control in what I say, and who I argue with - they know where I live...

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Jeri
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 12:42 PM

When I dove into the Internet, I used my entire real name. I think most people did, but either there were fewer psychopaths than there eventually were, or they at least hid better.

What I find amusing is that a guy who has always given me the impression he disdains Facebook, if not *hates* it, has never been a member, is now encouraging people to "ditch" it. Facebook is not without problems, but the vibe I'm getting from the haters is that they're the sort of folks who are just looking for someone they can label "monsters" so they can encourage villagers to pick up their torches and pitchforks, and go storm the castle.

Well, I suppose you do what you love to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 12:29 PM

Ha! Maybe I should become ‘Backwoodsperson’? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 12:24 PM

John, back in the day it was beneficial to use a gender-neutral name. In some forums (on the Internet in general) it still is. Monikers provided a bit of privacy while most friends knew exactly who you were. A couple of Mudcatters have tried to change their names and had to go back to the moniker because no one knew who they were under their real names. (Rapparee comes to mind in this. No one knew who Mike Doelmann was, so he went back to his moniker.) There are a couple of Mudcatters who change names regularly who I manage to keep up with by clicking on the new name to see what else they posted. Breadcrumbs. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 12:16 PM

The Mudcat FB page is one of those that I would miss very much if it went away. I seldom post there - maybe three or four times that I can recall - but I lurk, I read others’ posts, watch their videos, and get information from there. And, dare I say it, it’s a very much more civilised (by which I mean ‘less combative’) place than the forum - no bust-ups, no politics, just music and music-based topics.

And, of course, people who post there do so under their real names (assuming their FB accounts are set up under their real names) - something I know Steve has often said he would prefer to be in operation on the forum (although I would not, for all the negative reasons Maggie sets out above.

Subject: RE: BS: Let's ditch Facebook
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Nov 21 - 11:42 AM

When you look at your friends list on Facebook you can click on a name and see who are your friends in common. When I look at Joe Offer's name, we have 88 mutual friends. Care to hazard a guess where we met? Jeanene Pratt and I share 74 mutual friends. Severn Savage and I share 58 mutual friends. Charlie Ipcar - 58 mutual friends. Deb Cowan, Bruce Baker, Jerry Rasumssen, George Papavgeris . . . you get the idea. Over time we've connected on Facebook as a backup to Mudcat (especially in those times when it is out due to weather or mechanical catastrophe) and a way to "see the pictures."

The other large cluster of mutual friends is from my work at the university, though I was careful there not to friend management, just on general principles. Now that I'm retired, I find it nice to keep up with friends that way.

The Mudcat Facebook page was at one time Troll Central, the old Mudcat troll from about 2009 to 2013 had dozens of fake accounts that inhabited that page and were put up exclusively to harass forum members who also had Facebook accounts (and some who didn't). He harvested photos (before we all knew about how to set the sharing on our accounts to keep him from doing that) and stirred in a mix of political BNP/EDL/etc crap OR a mix of softcore porn and launched these things to make people miserable. It took a lot of work to get those accounts taken down and the dozens of Flickr accounts with his stashes of similar photos removed.

That said, it's remarkable that any old-time Mudcat members want to have anything to do with the Facebook page. It took a lot of moderation and vetting new members (the troll has made numerous attempts to rejoin) to finally make it seem like a safe place again. There were a half-dozen or so Mudcat members working behind the scenes to get rid of that crap, even doing legal work to approach the hosting sites ("My Opera" was particularly pernicious). Mudcat is worth it, but a lot of newcomers don't know that history, and aren't aware of why sometimes the rules on the FB page seem a bit rigid. Facebook would eat Mudcat's lunch in no time at all if we let all of our activity happen there - and Zuckerberg gets the revenue from all of those eyeballs, not Max, who runs this forum and remarkable music database. Plus, what happens on Facebook is usually lost on Facebook within a couple of days, and you have to know how to search for old stuff on Facebook to retrieve a fraction of it.

We get arguers, people who don't want to do it that way, who recite the rules back at us and suggest we need to do this or that - because they want to do what they want to do. Sometimes I'd be perfectly happy if the FB page went completely away - except someone else would create it again. So it's better to wrangle the one that exists and try to keep the wealth of music content and history information over here at Mudcat Central. And a final thought, a lot of old-time Mudcatters simply don't or won't use Facebook (see the OP). They miss a lot if it only happens in the Zuckerberg Zone.

Here's a pretty good example of the two sites working together: The Cruel Sister (post with video and conversation).

/rant off