http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/ the love of change Thu, 22 Dec 2011 02:54:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2417 Meg Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:50:06 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2417 Joining this conversation a little late. I wonder what this would look like in the real world. Running around with an invisibility cloke like Mr.Potter. Or the reverse, being always available - opening your mail box (the one in the real world) outside your house just to read your mail, and finding ALL your friends/acquantances standing around for small talk. Wouldn't that be a shocker! I think it would be better to cut out the frivolous online small-talk. Dump chat and meet people instead. Or atleast call or send a long-ish mail. While e-mails could be an extension of real mails/letters, instant messaging is a social killer in the real world. Joining this conversation a little late. I wonder what this would look like in the real world. Running around with an invisibility cloke like Mr.Potter. Or the reverse, being always available – opening your mail box (the one in the real world) outside your house just to read your mail, and finding ALL your friends/acquantances standing around for small talk. Wouldn't that be a shocker! I think it would be better to cut out the frivolous online small-talk. Dump chat and meet people instead. Or atleast call or send a long-ish mail. While e-mails could be an extension of real mails/letters, instant messaging is a social killer in the real world.

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2271 Jarred Taylor Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:38:17 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2271 Certainly. But in your case, you can simply sign out of GTalk completely.<br>Then you are neither be seen nor can you see. What I think is unfair is the<br>lopsidedness of invisibility. Certainly. But in your case, you can simply sign out of GTalk completely.
Then you are neither be seen nor can you see. What I think is unfair is the
lopsidedness of invisibility.

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2270 Ann Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:12:15 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2270 Well, although I can see your point, I don't completely agree with it. I am talking solely about gmail chat feature and not any of the other social networks - which with one exception , I don't use.<br>I have had gmail for as long as I remember gmail existing. It's an email service. That's what I use it for. To read my emails. I really am not interested in chatting or even worse have all this people that ever sent me an email suddenly talking to me in chat. By the same token, I certainly will not be initiating any chats with them either, regardless of them being online or not. I am reading my emails, and often work related ones and that's all I want to do. When I first noticed the chat on gmail I wasn't extremely happy about it, and realizing there was no way to go invisible upset me even more. I really don't want distractions and, maybe I can be called antisocial, but I have my friends, I'm not looking for friendship on the web and much less spending time chatting with people I don't even know.<br>I can see the benefits for the ones who enjoy it, of any chat program, but I really believe that it should be the choice of the person if they are available or not.<br>That said, and when I wrote that as a rule I don't subscribe to social networks, I do have facebook. And again, my reasons for that are much more private than the majority of people. It was done in order to be in touch with friends and family. Only. Not their friends, or the friends of their friends. I didn't include my contacts and I don't accept new friends unless they belong to the above category. I am not hiding behind an invisible presence to strike whoever I see online with a chat request, I just don't want to be talking to new people.<br>True, throughout the years I have made some friends over the internet, but I don't suddenly treat everyone I receive and email from or sent one to as my long last friend and someone that I have the right to engage in conversation just because I realized he/she is online. And I expect the same done to me.<br>I can see your point in social networks like myspace and facebook and all the other ones. As a rule people become a part of it, to make new friends. However gmail is just an email service.I didn't deliberately choose to become part of a social network by choosing gmail as my email service.And |I expect the right to be able not to be available for chat if I don't want to - which as a rule I don't. Well, although I can see your point, I don't completely agree with it. I am talking solely about gmail chat feature and not any of the other social networks – which with one exception , I don't use.
I have had gmail for as long as I remember gmail existing. It's an email service. That's what I use it for. To read my emails. I really am not interested in chatting or even worse have all this people that ever sent me an email suddenly talking to me in chat. By the same token, I certainly will not be initiating any chats with them either, regardless of them being online or not. I am reading my emails, and often work related ones and that's all I want to do. When I first noticed the chat on gmail I wasn't extremely happy about it, and realizing there was no way to go invisible upset me even more. I really don't want distractions and, maybe I can be called antisocial, but I have my friends, I'm not looking for friendship on the web and much less spending time chatting with people I don't even know.
I can see the benefits for the ones who enjoy it, of any chat program, but I really believe that it should be the choice of the person if they are available or not.
That said, and when I wrote that as a rule I don't subscribe to social networks, I do have facebook. And again, my reasons for that are much more private than the majority of people. It was done in order to be in touch with friends and family. Only. Not their friends, or the friends of their friends. I didn't include my contacts and I don't accept new friends unless they belong to the above category. I am not hiding behind an invisible presence to strike whoever I see online with a chat request, I just don't want to be talking to new people.
True, throughout the years I have made some friends over the internet, but I don't suddenly treat everyone I receive and email from or sent one to as my long last friend and someone that I have the right to engage in conversation just because I realized he/she is online. And I expect the same done to me.
I can see your point in social networks like myspace and facebook and all the other ones. As a rule people become a part of it, to make new friends. However gmail is just an email service.I didn't deliberately choose to become part of a social network by choosing gmail as my email service.And |I expect the right to be able not to be available for chat if I don't want to – which as a rule I don't.

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2047 Jarred Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:38:17 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2047 Certainly. But in your case, you can simply sign out of GTalk completely.<br>Then you are neither be seen nor can you see. What I think is unfair is the<br>lopsidedness of invisibility. Certainly. But in your case, you can simply sign out of GTalk completely.
Then you are neither be seen nor can you see. What I think is unfair is the
lopsidedness of invisibility.

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2046 Ann Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:12:15 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2046 Well, although I can see your point, I don't completely agree with it. I am talking solely about gmail chat feature and not any of the other social networks - which with one exception , I don't use.<br>I have had gmail for as long as I remember gmail existing. It's an email service. That's what I use it for. To read my emails. I really am not interested in chatting or even worse have all this people that ever sent me an email suddenly talking to me in chat. By the same token, I certainly will not be initiating any chats with them either, regardless of them being online or not. I am reading my emails, and often work related ones and that's all I want to do. When I first noticed the chat on gmail I wasn't extremely happy about it, and realizing there was no way to go invisible upset me even more. I really don't want distractions and, maybe I can be called antisocial, but I have my friends, I'm not looking for friendship on the web and much less spending time chatting with people I don't even know.<br>I can see the benefits for the ones who enjoy it, of any chat program, but I really believe that it should be the choice of the person if they are available or not.<br>That said, and when I wrote that as a rule I don't subscribe to social networks, I do have facebook. And again, my reasons for that are much more private than the majority of people. It was done in order to be in touch with friends and family. Only. Not their friends, or the friends of their friends. I didn't include my contacts and I don't accept new friends unless they belong to the above category. I am not hiding behind an invisible presence to strike whoever I see online with a chat request, I just don't want to be talking to new people.<br>True, throughout the years I have made some friends over the internet, but I don't suddenly treat everyone I receive and email from or sent one to as my long last friend and someone that I have the right to engage in conversation just because I realized he/she is online. And I expect the same done to me.<br>I can see your point in social networks like myspace and facebook and all the other ones. As a rule people become a part of it, to make new friends. However gmail is just an email service.I didn't deliberately choose to become part of a social network by choosing gmail as my email service.And |I expect the right to be able not to be available for chat if I don't want to - which as a rule I don't. Well, although I can see your point, I don't completely agree with it. I am talking solely about gmail chat feature and not any of the other social networks – which with one exception , I don't use.
I have had gmail for as long as I remember gmail existing. It's an email service. That's what I use it for. To read my emails. I really am not interested in chatting or even worse have all this people that ever sent me an email suddenly talking to me in chat. By the same token, I certainly will not be initiating any chats with them either, regardless of them being online or not. I am reading my emails, and often work related ones and that's all I want to do. When I first noticed the chat on gmail I wasn't extremely happy about it, and realizing there was no way to go invisible upset me even more. I really don't want distractions and, maybe I can be called antisocial, but I have my friends, I'm not looking for friendship on the web and much less spending time chatting with people I don't even know.
I can see the benefits for the ones who enjoy it, of any chat program, but I really believe that it should be the choice of the person if they are available or not.
That said, and when I wrote that as a rule I don't subscribe to social networks, I do have facebook. And again, my reasons for that are much more private than the majority of people. It was done in order to be in touch with friends and family. Only. Not their friends, or the friends of their friends. I didn't include my contacts and I don't accept new friends unless they belong to the above category. I am not hiding behind an invisible presence to strike whoever I see online with a chat request, I just don't want to be talking to new people.
True, throughout the years I have made some friends over the internet, but I don't suddenly treat everyone I receive and email from or sent one to as my long last friend and someone that I have the right to engage in conversation just because I realized he/she is online. And I expect the same done to me.
I can see your point in social networks like myspace and facebook and all the other ones. As a rule people become a part of it, to make new friends. However gmail is just an email service.I didn't deliberately choose to become part of a social network by choosing gmail as my email service.And |I expect the right to be able not to be available for chat if I don't want to – which as a rule I don't.

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-1367 Daniel Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:49:27 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-1367 I was also disappointed with Google for implementing this so-called feature. It ultimately lowers the utility of it, the costs far outweighing the benefits. Fortunately, Facebook's chat does not have an invisible mode (yet). I was also disappointed with Google for implementing this so-called feature. It ultimately lowers the utility of it, the costs far outweighing the benefits. Fortunately, Facebook’s chat does not have an invisible mode (yet).

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2755 Daniel Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:49:00 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2755 I was also disappointed with Google for implementing this so-called feature. It ultimately lowers the utility of it, the costs far outweighing the benefits. Fortunately, Facebook's chat does not have an invisible mode (yet). I was also disappointed with Google for implementing this so-called feature. It ultimately lowers the utility of it, the costs far outweighing the benefits. Fortunately, Facebook’s chat does not have an invisible mode (yet).

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-1339 Jarred Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:15:34 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-1339 Thanks, JonnyBalbo, for your thoughtful comment... Thanks, JonnyBalbo, for your thoughtful comment…

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-2757 Jarred Taylor Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:15:00 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-2757 Thanks, JonnyBalbo, for your thoughtful comment... Thanks, JonnyBalbo, for your thoughtful comment…

]]> http://tropophilia.com/2008/02/25/invisibility-a-violation-of-the-social-networking-contract/#comment-1338 JonnyBalbo Mon, 09 Jun 2008 20:07:13 +0000 http://tropophilia.com/?p=126#comment-1338 Well Jarred i think you are just being stupid. Go invisible! Well Jarred i think you are just being stupid. Go invisible!

]]>