I think it is a wrong move by Facebook. But FB is doing it just so to become the WALMART of social networking. In another words, they want be everything and anything on the website. The problem is, are they now going to allow you to contact anyone you dont know? Becuase that was the difference between FB and Myspace and if they allow that, that takes away one of the best thing about fb. Yes you can say, only those who select Networking will have their account opened but eventually everyone is going is select that.
Also I still want facebook for social only. I want to go to specific site that focuses on professional networking where i am surrounded by professional individual and recruiters. Facebook is not setup for that. It is like buying suits at a clothing store as opposed to a suit store. I am not saying Linkedin is a suit store, they are horrible. But as a student, I will trust and prefer to go to a site that is solely dedicated to professional networking only.
Michael Bauser
· 2 years ago
Weird: When I go to the Relationships section of Edit My Profile, "Random Play" and "Whatever I can get" aren't on the list of options anymore. Is that a glitch, or does Facebook want to get rid of those as part of "growing up?"
(I still see those options on the Advanced Search, though.)
Nick O'Neill
· 2 years ago
It still shows up in mine so I'm not sure why that is.
Chris Jay
· 2 years ago
it shows up on mine too. But it seems somewhat pointless becuase when you click on it, it displays everyone within your network only. So basically we are restricted to networking within our network. If my network is in Kansas, i can't network with people out of Kansas which defeats the whole purpose of online networking.
Brett
· 2 years ago
I don't think LinkedIn is 'going down.' I think there site is a very valuable tool to accomplish what it was built to do - store contacts in a format in a dynamic way. I would (personally) disagree that 'public extension of my Outlook contact list.' My outlook contact box doesn't allow me to connect to others via degrees of separation...and doesn't give near the amount of information that is stored and viewable on a LinkedIn account. I find value in LinkedIn that I am not currently realizing w. my FB account...
Michael Bauser
· 2 years ago
Oh well, I guess the missing boxes are my personal glitch. (It wouldn't be the first time something nonsensical happened to my account -- there were a couple of weeks last month where all of my Past Events disappeared.)
Getting back on topic: Adding a "Networking" purpose and friend-grouping won't by themselves, make Facebook a competitor for LinkedIn. Like the "Dating" purpose, "Networking" is mostly an announcement that the user is OK with a certain level of unsolicited e-mail. LinkedIn still has business features, like industry categorizations and degrees of separation that Facebook doesn't.
In fact, LinkedIn's version of purpose is much more nuanced, letting users announce whether they're accepting "job inquires," "consulting offers," "business inquiries," etc. For power users who actually use LinkedIn to network with associates-of-associates, Facebook has nothing equivalent.
Creating the "Networking" purpose (and the future plans for friend-grouping) are only part of what it would take to compete with LinkedIn's feature set. Facebook, at the very least, needs to add detail to the "Work" section of user profiles (industry/institution types), let business networkers fine-tune their contact preferences (this would probably require senders flagging messages by purpose, a feature Facebook barely has now), and figure out a way to encourage communication between indirect contacts that doesn't infringe on the degrees-of-separation patent LinkedIn benefits from.
Which are all features I wouldn't use anyway (I only joined LinkedIn because I was helping my brother pump up his network), but they seem to be things that the LinkedIn power users love.
Michael Bauser
· 2 years ago
Hey, wait -- it isn't my personal glitch. The trackback link in message 8 includes a screenshot of the same problem: no "Random Play" and "Whatever I can get." See, there is something wrong!
(Or maybe I'm just not considered cool enough for "Random Play." Come on, Facebook -- I can be just as shallow as the next guy, I swear!)
Michael Bauser
· 2 years ago
I'm the only one still following this discussion aren't I?
Anyway, I received an e-mail from Facebook customer support this afternoon that says "Facebook recently changed these settings to provide non-college users with a more mature set of options."
So my missing 2 boxes aren't a bug. Facebook just thinks I'm more mature than the rest of you. Go figure.
Now I'm wondering how Facebook defines "non-college users." I'm actually a member of two university networks, but not a student, and neither network is my primary. Would I be allowed to look for "Whatever I can get" if I reprioritized my networks? Do I have to be a student? Does this mean that Facebook users who never go to college can't look for "Random play?" (I would feel bad for any 19-year olds denied to their right to have low standards just because they didn't go to college.)
This strikes me as very weird place (in the user interface) for Facebook to get prudish about its users' social lives.
I e-mailed some questions back to Customer Support. Let's see if they answer.
Chaz
· 2 years ago
I am a college student whose primary network is my university. However, the options for "Whatever I Can Get" and "Random Play" are not available on my "Looking For" section of my profile. I do not have "Networking" checked, and I never have. I was updating other things, and noticed those two were missing, did a Google search to try to find out when and why, and I came here. Unless they've since removed them from everyone's profile (given the last comment here was in October), I don't know why those two options would be missing from mine. Oh well, I never had those checked anyhow.
All Comments
Also I still want facebook for social only. I want to go to specific site that focuses on professional networking where i am surrounded by professional individual and recruiters. Facebook is not setup for that. It is like buying suits at a clothing store as opposed to a suit store. I am not saying Linkedin is a suit store, they are horrible. But as a student, I will trust and prefer to go to a site that is solely dedicated to professional networking only.
(I still see those options on the Advanced Search, though.)
Getting back on topic: Adding a "Networking" purpose and friend-grouping won't by themselves, make Facebook a competitor for LinkedIn. Like the "Dating" purpose, "Networking" is mostly an announcement that the user is OK with a certain level of unsolicited e-mail. LinkedIn still has business features, like industry categorizations and degrees of separation that Facebook doesn't.
In fact, LinkedIn's version of purpose is much more nuanced, letting users announce whether they're accepting "job inquires," "consulting offers," "business inquiries," etc. For power users who actually use LinkedIn to network with associates-of-associates, Facebook has nothing equivalent.
Creating the "Networking" purpose (and the future plans for friend-grouping) are only part of what it would take to compete with LinkedIn's feature set. Facebook, at the very least, needs to add detail to the "Work" section of user profiles (industry/institution types), let business networkers fine-tune their contact preferences (this would probably require senders flagging messages by purpose, a feature Facebook barely has now), and figure out a way to encourage communication between indirect contacts that doesn't infringe on the degrees-of-separation patent LinkedIn benefits from.
Which are all features I wouldn't use anyway (I only joined LinkedIn because I was helping my brother pump up his network), but they seem to be things that the LinkedIn power users love.
(Or maybe I'm just not considered cool enough for "Random Play." Come on, Facebook -- I can be just as shallow as the next guy, I swear!)
Anyway, I received an e-mail from Facebook customer support this afternoon that says "Facebook recently changed these settings to provide non-college users with a more mature set of options."
So my missing 2 boxes aren't a bug. Facebook just thinks I'm more mature than the rest of you. Go figure.
Now I'm wondering how Facebook defines "non-college users." I'm actually a member of two university networks, but not a student, and neither network is my primary. Would I be allowed to look for "Whatever I can get" if I reprioritized my networks? Do I have to be a student? Does this mean that Facebook users who never go to college can't look for "Random play?" (I would feel bad for any 19-year olds denied to their right to have low standards just because they didn't go to college.)
This strikes me as very weird place (in the user interface) for Facebook to get prudish about its users' social lives.
I e-mailed some questions back to Customer Support. Let's see if they answer.