var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
RB_Bhoy
April 22, 2009 12:34 AM
Moderate | Flag for review

i voted. pro new TOS.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Valerie Flame
April 22, 2009 7:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RB_Bhoy: Hey consumerist, which one is the one we're supposed to pick? Help too many words.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
RB_Bhoy
April 22, 2009 12:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

and really, how many of FB's users are fake accounts created by nigerians to scam people selling stuff in the marketplace?

i put a guitar, car, and a half dozen schoolbooks up there at different times and would get like 10+ messages a day from some shithead trying to scam me into sending them my item for free or giving them all my personal info. it was always the same message, same typos, same grammar...just different names from all over the US and canada.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Galactica
April 22, 2009 3:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RB_Bhoy: You're thinking of Craigslist.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Xkeeper
April 22, 2009 1:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@RB_Bhoy: Considering I've seen users with hundreds of friends with completely random, gibberish names, yeah. I'm going to have to call bullshit on the \"active in last month\" metric.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Air Conditioner
April 22, 2009 6:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Xkeeper: Hey! I resemble that remark!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
philmin
April 22, 2009 12:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

There is zero chance they get to that 30% of active users in past month number.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
asplodzor
April 22, 2009 4:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@philmin: I agree with everyone saying that this looks like it has been deliberately downplayed. This the FIRST that I have heard of this vote, and it's been going for a day shy of a full month???

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rdwarrior
April 22, 2009 9:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@asplodzor: I don't know but there has been at least two times that a bar on the top of my homepage has appeared when I login'd to Facebook saying vote and become a fan of the Facebook governance page...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
howman
April 22, 2009 1:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@philmin: They may pull the 'We tried thing' but they will notice when the 320000 users... who prob. are also the top users decide to walk away... I dare say the 300K who did vote are like the top 1% of down loaders who create 99% of the traffic argument... If they leave FB 99% of their content, advertising market, connections etc are gone. Oh well it is nice to dream after I have already woken up.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
shockwaver
April 22, 2009 1:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@howman: I doubt it. I didn't know about the vote until just now, and how many others are like that? Out of all the people I know that use facebook, most of them heavily, none of them -care- about this sort of thing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
HaxRomana
April 22, 2009 4:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shockwaver: I use Facebook weekdailyish, but this is the first I've heard of this...and I DO care about this sort of thing.

I realize that in the grand scheme of things, Facebook policy is on the low end of the priority spectrum for most people, but I think that there would be more than 327,000 votes if they'd, maybe, like, told people. Maybe I'm stupid and missed the gigantic VOTE NOW banner ad, but whatever they did clearly wasn't sufficient.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 22, 2009 12:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@philmin: No kidding, considering no announcement of the vote was ever made and as of this comment, it stands at 322,215 people. Way to undercut, Facebook... Way to undercut.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Lucky225
April 22, 2009 12:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

f*ck FAKEBOOK AKA FACISTBOOK

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Traveshamockery
April 22, 2009 1:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Lucky225: Can we stop calling everything \"facist\"? It's as played out as \"Wall Street vs. Main Street\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
April 22, 2009 2:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Lucky225: It's not really \"facist\" if you willingly sign up to use a completely non-essential website.

There are more important issues out there. That said, I think this just goes to show you that most folks on the internet would rather complain than actually do something. Or that all the Facebook TOS hoopla was blown way out of proportion.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
April 22, 2009 12:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Voted for the new TOS. To their credit, they are very clear on which is which and don't bog the choices down with legal speak.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
B
April 22, 2009 12:57 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm not allowed to vote, as I just joined recently.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Keter
April 22, 2009 10:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@B: Ditto. Didn't they open up membership to adults (as opposed to college kids) after the cut off date? Almost all of my friends are also recent joiners. If so, I call shenanigans!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 22, 2009 12:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@B: Don't bother worrying about it... considering the current tally, it's not happening.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
LostAngeles
April 22, 2009 1:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall seeing it on my feed which is pretty much the page I look at when I log into Facebook. You have to go to Facebook's page to find it.

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
Papercutninja
April 22, 2009 2:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: Nope. No notification of this. Although there are plenty of notifications on \"What Disney Character Are You?\" for fucks sake.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShadowWylde
April 22, 2009 7:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: the notice has been at the top of my \"HOME\" page for the last couple of days. it is not in the feed, but is a fixed paragraph above the feed in a shaded box.

Vote on Facebook's Governing Documents
We've revised the two new documents we proposed to govern the site, the Facebook Principles and the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, based on your feedback. Now, we want you to vote for the system of governance you think is best. Voting will close on April 23 at 11:59am PDT. Visit the Facebook Site Governance application to learn more, read the documents, and vote.
Reply
\"user-pic\"
asplodzor
April 22, 2009 4:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShadowWylde: I do not ever recall seeing that notice on any part of facebook. I check my account about once per day.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShadowWylde
April 22, 2009 7:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@asplodzor: the notice is still residing at the top of my home page on FB today. i check my FB frequently and it remains firmly in place in its blue shaded box.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kogenta
April 23, 2009 12:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShadowWylde: I just showed up today for me.


I find it interesting that in the last 24 hours, over 135,000 new votes have been cast compared to it taking 5 days to reach 300,000

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LostAngeles
April 23, 2009 5:48 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Kogenta: It just showed up for me today as well.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kogenta
April 22, 2009 2:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShadowWylde: That's certainly not there on my page, and I ussually read those notices because it knocks the normal layout down a bit.


Since I check facebook at least once a day, I think I would have remembered seeing it. Facebook really hasn't been making this vote very public. I wouldn't have known about it at all if I hadn't seen it here.


Be interesting to see if the next thing to come up is massive backlash about lack of letting users know about this vote.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Absent minded or just absent
April 22, 2009 11:52 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ShadowWylde: That's curious. I just checked my account after reading this post, and there is certainly no mention of a vote to be found anywhere on my home page or any settings page or my profile page. If a tree falls in a forest...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PinkBox
April 22, 2009 11:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Absent minded or just absent: Same here, I'm on Facebook every day, and this is the first I've heard of it.

I voted, but if they're looking for 30%, they aren't going to get it if someone like me who is on there several times daily hadn't noticed it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
GuidedByLemons
April 22, 2009 5:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: Yeah, I'm a regular user and never heard about this until just now. Holding a vote without bothering to tell anybody about it is pretty sketchy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
majin_chichi
April 22, 2009 3:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: Same here. if I hadn't seen this on Consumerist now, I wouldn't know there was a vote to be had. I don't go to Facebook's page as a general habit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
April 22, 2009 3:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@majin_chichi: Which is what they're counting on, of course. Funny that they'll put up \"notifications\" of every crappy little thing up to and including a friend of a friend taking some film quiz, but not put this up or send out PMs. I'm getting really fed up with Facebook of late.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Etoiles
April 22, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FaustianSlip: Although when someone you know votes in it, it does show up (and it's a large, visible notice) in your feed. That's how I know my fiancé voted on it last night before bed. ;)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ZekeSulastin
April 22, 2009 1:05 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"4.4 You will not use Facebook if you are a convicted sex offender.\"

Right, because being a registered sex offender means you are a horrible perverted boil upon society assuredly using the service only to further your corruptive desires.

I'm abstaining from this vote.

Reply
10 replies
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
April 22, 2009 5:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: But what if the little nine-year-old trollop really asked for it?

OK, poor-taste jokes aside, prosecutors go WAY overboard with the charge, as noted above. They're also wildly homophobic about it (comparing m/f & m/m and f/f PDAs).

So yeah, I'm leery too.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 22, 2009 12:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: Well, with the distinct exception of the young boy who received naked photos via text message and now has to register as a sex offender for the dumbest of possible offenses, what you tried to sound off as sarcasm is usually exactly what occurs.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
April 22, 2009 2:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Papa Midnight: So you believe that people who commit sex crimes are irredeemable and should just be written off for life and never allowed to reintegrate into society once they've served their time?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 23, 2009 1:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@johnva: Are you trying to redirect the topic from the original direction of the comment above? The subject is what he posted, not what I posted. Start a new topic and don't come off like the inquisitor and I may be inclined to answer it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Coles_Law
April 22, 2009 2:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: In many cases, it would violate their parole/terms of release/etc.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
April 22, 2009 2:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: Actually, convicted sex offenders are overall not full of awesome. Some people might be okay with beating up hookers, but I'm not. Just because you may be convicted for something that isn't \"as bad\" in someone else's eyes, doesn't mean you should be allowed to freely roam amongst the public.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
snowburnt
April 22, 2009 2:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: You could be a registered sex offender for:

* Being bullied into pleading no contest for downloading and not looking at porn.
* Chastising a child for running into the middle of the street while their mother is talking on their cell phone.
* Urinating outside at a college party.
* Being a high-school student and playing a prank involving nudity or sending naked pictures of yourself (\"sexting\")

There are so many ways to become a sex offender now that it's ruining normal people's lives and losing it's stigma. In a few years it will be a rite of passage.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
April 22, 2009 9:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@snowburnt: I'm all about changing the sex offender laws. But Facebook should not have to let in the worst of the worst because our Gooberment needs to better-define that type of thing. We could spend all day listing examples of how people have been wronged by sex offender laws (and I'd agree with every single one!). I'm not advocating punishing the many because of the few...but the many have a good case for making the government change the laws, and we need to advocate that, not field day on social-networking websites. Participation in which, I might add, is not a constitutional right.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 23, 2009 1:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@katstermonster: Government issues, aside: Facebook has the right to declare a ban on all sex-offenders if they so choose as they are a private company, not a federal or state owned entity. On that note, many states bar Registered Sex Offenders from accessing social networking sites, let alone the internet, so the point is honestly rather moot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Real Cheese Flavor
April 22, 2009 12:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: The problem is that it's not just rapists and child molesters who wind up being convicted sex offenders but people who do a variety of lesser (yet still objectionable) things such as streaking, flashing, or public urination.

Not to mention the instances of 18 year olds getting arrested for having sex with their 16-17 year old boy/girlfriends.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ZekeSulastin
April 22, 2009 12:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: ...

Pecan, I was referring SPECIFICALLY to what Kaster's second paragraph mentioned, in my usual caustic sarcastic tone. Yeah, there are the child molesters etc. ad nauseam, then there are the He's 18 She's 16 or the teenagers sending themselves naked pictures who wind up on the exact same registry with the exact same fallout as your molester or rapist. I definitely am in the camp to fix those laws.

I guess it would be easier to delineate between case a and case b if Facebook was still for schoolgoers only, but w/e.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
johnva
April 22, 2009 3:35 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: I don't think that people are saying they think it's not bad to be a sex offender. I think they are saying that this \"punishment for life, but only for sex crimes\" stuff is ridiculous.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
April 22, 2009 1:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: I'm all about individual rights, but in a LOT of cases (not all! but the dangerous ones, to be sure), the situation that you sarcastically mentioned is exactly what happens. Not all. Maybe not even the majority. But the dangerous ones, and that's what matters. I'd honestly rather they draw the line somewhere than nowhere.

Now, if you want to discuss changing the sex offender laws insofar as they are unfair to first-time, mild offenders (he's 18, she's 16, whoops!), I'm totally with you. :)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
XTC46
April 22, 2009 1:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

this is not going to pass becasue everyone only gave a crap while it was cool to give a crap. very few people actually care about this.

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
Shadowfire
April 22, 2009 1:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Is it that people don't care, or people don't know? I had no clue this vote was happening.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Will Ross
April 22, 2009 7:06 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shadowfire: I got a notification bar on top of my feed a couple days ago.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The_IT_Crone
April 22, 2009 2:14 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shadowfire: well, if the word spreads and the number of votes jumps dramatically- then we'll know.

Personally, this is the first I'd heard about it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Adam Breslin
April 22, 2009 2:34 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@The_IT_Crone: This is also the first I've heard about it. It is not on the news feed or front page that I could find. I think Facebook did this on purpose because they knew the majority of users would not seek out the vote.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
chrylis
April 22, 2009 1:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is an interesting example of a false dilemma. I actually voted for the old TOS, because while the new one is written in clear English, it's much more open to interpretation at Facebook's discretion, in ways that could be problematic for users. However, by presenting a forced choice between the legalese with better terms or a plain-English version with more loopholes and user restrictions, it seems pretty clear that the users are mostly opting for the new version.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 5:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chrylis: Even with the possible loopholes, the proposed Statement of Rights & Responsibilities still seems like the better TOS. An excerpt from the old TOS:

\"By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.\"

The new one at least mentions users being able to control their content with privacy settings. Another thing in the old TOS, but not in the new one is mandatory binding arbitration. While I don't think I would ever be in a position to be really damaged by Facebook, it's nice to know I can take them to court.... in California. The only thing that bothers me about the new TOS is:

\"10.3 You understand that we may not always identify paid services and communications as such.\"

Overall the new TOS seems less restrictive to the user (with an added bonus of reduced legalese), despite the loopholes and section 10.3.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MeOhMy
April 22, 2009 1:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@OrlenaDawli:
The TOS does away with Mandatory Binding Arbitration which is right there a win, although I have to wonder if there isn't some sort of gotcha, as the venue required for suing them was moved...perhaps the new venue always makes plaintiffs go through arbitration before letting them go to court?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ChChChacos
April 22, 2009 1:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't think they're advertising this vote enough. It only showed up once in my news feed a few days ago, and I didn't have the time to read it over and actually completely forgot about it until now, seeing it again on the Consumerist. My vote is in.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 1:31 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This vote is a total sham. I'm constantly logged into my Facebook account, yet I have not heard about this vote until I read it here on Consumerist.com.

How can Facebook users vote if Facebook isn't informing their users about the vote.

What a load of crap!!!

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
XTC46
April 22, 2009 1:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is why companies dont ask for users opionions a lot of the time. It is becasue most users are too uninformed and uneducated to make an educated vote, so they end up voting for whatever they think is popular. And no, it is not the websites job to inform users of all the normal legal stuff they include in the TOS.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
calquist
April 22, 2009 2:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xtc46: I agree. Just make the changes and post them. If users don't like the new TOS, they can leave (and they won't).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LionelEHutz
April 22, 2009 2:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xtc46:

What planet do you live on skippy? The TOS is a contract and they have an obligation to inform you of changes, especially changes that affect your IP rights.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Yokai Monsters Spook Warfare
April 22, 2009 2:58 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xtc46: \"it is not the websites job to inform users of all the normal legal stuff they include in the TOS\"

Um, yes, yes it is. When you have a facebook account, you have entered into a contract with the company that owns the site agree to do and not do certain things and in return they will do and not do certain things as well. Now, Facebook is free to put whatever they so choose in those terms and change them whenever they get the notion BUT IT IS THEIR LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY to inform everyone with an account or that contract isn't valid.

If it were a mortgage or a loan, would you be OK with them just asking for a signature and not giving you the opportunity to read the document because \"it isn't their job to inform [you] of all the normal legal stuff\"?

Granted, informing the users and actually making them read and comprehend it is a whole different ballgame, of course. I what you say about the voting is more often than not true.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LegoMan322
April 22, 2009 1:40 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xtc46: repeat from top post.......Yep....BAAAAAHHHHHH

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
prshack
April 22, 2009 1:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I didn't know about the vote until I read this article.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Papa Midnight
April 22, 2009 12:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@prshack: You and about 200 million other potential persons.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
godawgs7
April 22, 2009 2:42 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Here's the thing... I tried to find the vote a few days ago, and it is not being broadcast at all by facebook. I even did a google search and couldn't find a link. Of course they don't want the new terms, they want the old terms.

This is just a dog and pony show so they can say \"hey, we gave you the chance to vote but no one did, so obviously they didn't care about the TOS.\"

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
April 22, 2009 3:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@godawgs7: Yeah, I read things like \"but 300,000 is an embarrassingly low number for something so many people seemed to be so upset about\" and then wonder why me and all my friends who were upset about the terms of service haven't heard about it, and the Consumerist's inability to understand why seems to be incompetent journalism.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
HogwartsAlum
April 22, 2009 2:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I don't have Facebook but my brother does. I emailed this to him.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 3:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have Facebook and had no idea this vote was taking place. Some of my Facebook friends have had notices on top of their home page, but not me. You'd think that they might make room for it in and amongst the quizzes, ads, and other crap that is my new home page. Thanks for the heads up, Consumerist!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jay Gonzz
April 22, 2009 3:23 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

confusing... Considering the seriousness of the issue, wouldn't it be better to just have a big candy red button on the home page that sez, \"VOTE!\" Would this be too obvious?

How ever it goes the vote will NOT be close because if it was it could be open to debate and discussion. This would of course force Facebook to open its 'books', revealing the actual number of members, visits, views, etc.

Facebook's out of this world valuation(s) would melt away in the warm sunlight of documented fact.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
dirtleg
April 22, 2009 3:33 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I tried to vote but was shut down. I only joined a couple of weeks ago and so am not eligible.

I be disenfranchised.

Reply
1 replies
","","
\"user-pic\"
MooseOfReason
April 22, 2009 3:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I didn't hear about this.

But since they do have tens of millions of e-mail addresses, why didn't they send people a notification to come out and vote?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Throwmeabone
April 23, 2009 2:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MooseOfReason: There was a notification on your home page.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MooseOfReason
April 23, 2009 5:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Throwmeabone: I just went there now and saw the notification. I have logged onto Facebook several times this week, and tonight was the first time I noticed that.

But it would be very easy for them to send people an e-mail reminding them to vote.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LionelEHutz
April 22, 2009 2:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MooseOfReason:

Probably because they don't want people to vote.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
watchout5
April 22, 2009 4:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I didn't know the vote was happening and I don't really care, I don't care what facebook does with the stuff I put on there. I wouldn't put it on there if I didn't want the public accessing it.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
chatterboxwriting
April 22, 2009 4:18 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@undefined: @ZekeSulastin: Many states/municipalities require that offenders not even own a computer or access the Internet anywhere. If they do, they are violating their parole/probation.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
katstermonster
April 22, 2009 12:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chatterboxwriting: Agreed. I think Facebook's people were spending lots of time responding to requests from law enforcement for membership lists and dealing with individual cases of judicial systems asking them to shut down an account. It probably saves them a lot of trouble and us a lot of worry by just having an overarching rule. I'm totally on board with that.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Frank Murphy
April 22, 2009 4:36 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Facebook is not worth the hassle.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
zentex
April 22, 2009 4:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

dog meet pony *sigh*

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
yevarechecha
April 22, 2009 5:08 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hadn't heard about this either. I used the link here to vote just now, but in all honesty, I don't really care. I've had Facebook for 4 years and I rarely use it to do anything but see what old friends are up to every couple of months. I don't install apps, I take down all the pictures, I don't do quizzes, I barely do anything. Sometimes I do a status update to inform people that my location has shifted by more than 500 miles, but other than that, nothing. I leave the page up to be able to check old acquaintances or to allow people who don't have my e-mail or cell to contact me if they need to, but if it gets too annoying, I'll just deactivate the account and probably not miss it at all.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
okrick
April 22, 2009 5:09 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Thank you for posting the link to the voting site. I've seen several mentions of the vote but no links to the site and a search in Facebook was no help.

Hey, maybe this is why the turn out is so low.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
From the cubicle of PGibbons
April 22, 2009 5:11 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I never heard about this vote, not that I'm obsessive enough to find out about it (other than at Consumerist).

I think the *real* vote will be with people's feet - away from Facebook if they screw up again. They need only put themselves in the user's shoes and give their TOS the smell test. This fad of sites changing their TOS \"contracts\" like taking a daily dump should be reexamined. I don't want to play lawyer and peruse multiple contracts daily to discover and interpret the fine print, and I doubt few others do either.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
April 22, 2009 5:29 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PGibbons: Every single time Facebook has done something \"stupid,\" its users have gotten over it in a matter or weeks. Folks may complain, create useless groups, or post angry messages (and looking at the number of people in some of these groups, the voting statistics, etc.), less than 1% of users even care about this.

If anyone \"votes with their feet,\" it will be such an insignificant number of users that won't have any real effect.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
azntg
April 22, 2009 3:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@supercereal: Indeed.

I would go so far to argue that the best way to \"vote with your feet\" is to create more accounts at Facebook rather than leaving them per se. Let them deal with the added expenses.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Blaaaah
April 22, 2009 5:17 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

It irritated me that I had to install an application to vote.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Donald Webster
April 22, 2009 5:37 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Unfortunately, as of tonight-about 40 or so hours before the the voting ends (it's been going on since last week), only 300,000 users have cast their vote. For the vote to count, somewhere between 60 and 70 million users tens of millions of users will need to vote (we don't know the number of active users over the past 30 days, but Facebook says they've got over 200 million users total). Yeah.\"

The number that Facebook publishes (200 million active users) is the number of users active in the last 30 days. So they want 30% of 200 million.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Steve Williams
April 22, 2009 6:15 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I saw the vote I would assume this is a scam and wouldn't vote. I mean, really? Voting? Clicking in? This is advertising tactics and homey don't play that.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Marshfield
April 22, 2009 6:53 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I hadn't read it here I would have had NO idea there was a vote. It's almost like Facebook was hiding it from people. Naaah... they wouldn't do that...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 7:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm surprised that so many people didn't know about this. It appeared at the top of my facebook home page a few days ago, and while it's fairly nondescript, I noticed it.

I did, however, have a problem when I tried to vote. I got an error message that said they were still trying to fix the bugs or something. I tried again today and it worked fine.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Desk_hack
April 22, 2009 7:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

See that blue box with the white \"F\" in the middle of it under \"Read More:\"? Everyone needs to share this story on their Facebook profile in the next day so word spreads about the vote. This article is the perfect way to inform your friends.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
I love the Power Glove. It's so bad.
April 22, 2009 8:03 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"You are not eligible to vote on these documents because you joined Facebook after February 26, 2009, the day that the vote was announced. You are eligible to vote on any future change to Facebook's site governance documents that is put to a vote.\"

That's the message I got.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
I love the Power Glove. It's so bad.
April 22, 2009 8:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Oddly enough, if you try using the little link button right below the article (it's blue with a white F) it wouldn't let me post it to my profile on Facebook. Very odd. I tried it at work and home and it will not post!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Square Bottle
April 22, 2009 8:56 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Tried submitting this to Digg, but it was already submitted. Good, I say. Now we just need to digg it.

[digg.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
kyle4
April 22, 2009 11:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Most people probably don't know about. If I didn't, and I go on six blogs a day and check Facebook twice daily, then the average Joe wouldn't either.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
ZekeSulastin
April 22, 2009 12:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: Just like Shadow, I saw it at the top of my Facebook page for several days. Amazing, though, how quickly a failure to notice becomes a conspiracy theory ...

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
LostAngeles
April 22, 2009 2:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ZekeSulastin: I don't think it's a conspiracy theory myself. It's possible I just didn't notice it or somehow mentally marked it under the same category as, \"Notes from Tom!\" shit from MySpace.

Still, I have voted. They're up to ~325k now.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
LostAngeles
April 22, 2009 2:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@LostAngeles: I just realized that it'd be a lot easier (and possibly more effective) to, \"invite,\" my friends to its app, rather than updating my status with a link to it(which is what I did).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
TerribleDecade
April 22, 2009 12:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No, voting is for suckers.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
m-p{3}
April 22, 2009 12:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

To make it simple

Don't use, don't care.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
valen
April 22, 2009 12:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I voted for the old version.


The new version, while better formatted, contained too many cruel or unusual restrictions, such as:


\"3.6 You will not post content that is [...] pornographic, or that contains nudity [...].\"


I do not understand why they ban nudity, especially after banning pornography. The unclothed body is a natural work of art that is found throughout human culture.


Also: \"Contains nudity\" is fairly open to interpretation. If I post a picture of myself wearing only a loincloth, is that \"nudity\"?


\"4.1 You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook [...]\"


Suddenly, we go from the \"no impersonation\" standard to the \"no false information\" standard. The \"false personal information\" standard is a fairly broad term that could mean anything from impersonating another user to using an expired email account to saying that you like \"golf\" when you really hate the sport. Using Facebook should not be the equivalent of testifying under oath.


\"4.4 You will not use Facebook if you are a convicted sex offender.\"


Once again, we assume that every sex offender must be a sex predator. However, this rule bans people convicted of non predatory offenses such as public urination.


\"12.4 We can make changes for legal or administrative reasons upon notice without opportunity to comment.\"


They can still change this agreement at Facebook's sole discretion. Business as usual.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
SynMonger
April 22, 2009 1:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Lack of voting does not equal a NO vote. Bah!

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
dennis_k85
April 22, 2009 1:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I still can't even find where to vote at. There have been no notifications or anything. This is the first I have heard of it, and I log on at least once a day

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
HFC
April 22, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dennis_k85: Click the link above. After you vote, post the story to your profile page so your friends will have easy access to it.

I also changed my status to reference it and posted a note explaining why the vote was important.

Maybe this will work: [www.new.facebook.com]

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
LionelEHutz
April 22, 2009 2:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It would have been nice if facebook actually publicized the vote. This has never popped up on my notifications.
Facebook seems to give priority to those stupid snowball fight requests and other bullcrap instead of notifying users about important things.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
arstal
April 22, 2009 2:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My problem is I voted with my feet a year ago.

I just stick to LJ (which is no angel), and Twitter.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Geekybiker
April 22, 2009 3:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This popped up on my home page once, and never came back once I clicked away from the home page the first time. It wasn't even like a regular news item that gets buried over time. If're you're not searching for this, there is a good chance you'll never find it. Facebook needs to give more time for people to get out the vote via their own notices.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
April 22, 2009 3:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Error while loading page from Facebook Site Governance Vote\"

The fun begins!!!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
azsumrg1rl
April 22, 2009 3:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@undefined: @LostAngeles: I saw it once, at the top of the page, but it never showed up again. As others have said, it's probably intentional.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
polyeaster
April 22, 2009 3:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It was at the top of my home page for a day or so but has now disappeared...how do I find it again>?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
HFC
April 22, 2009 3:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@polyeaster: There are only three links above to the Governance page. Do you need more?

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
ZukeZuke
April 22, 2009 3:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think this will be more telling in that it will likely punch a big fat hole in Facebook's claimed 200 million users count that they like to celebrate and cheer about. I bet they have less than 10% active users, and I know people who have multiple accounts...

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Aidan Roche
April 22, 2009 4:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Facebook has done a terrible job of promoting this. I didn't know about it and neither did about 200 of my friends. I was swamped with Facebook groups and other stupid things when the new TOS were put forth but with this I haven't heard a peep.

I did vote for the new TOS though. Thanks for the heads up Consumerist.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Swizzler121
April 22, 2009 4:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

my friend is working on getting together an open source alternative to facebook, he's just missing one thing; a name, if you got a good one, contact him: ianweller.org

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Brian W.
April 22, 2009 5:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can we have a vote to return facebook back to the old interface? That is a vote that would garner a HUGE response.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
wheresmymind
April 22, 2009 5:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Man, I remember the good old days of Facebook. Back when it was \"thefacebook.com,\" when only college students could sign up (and you had to petition them to include your school on the site), it actually took some effort to stalk people, and it was used primarily to communicate 3 things: how drunk you were going to get that night, how drunk you were right then, and how drunk you were last night.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
anduin
April 22, 2009 5:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

facebook sucks, twitter sucks, all this social networking stuff sucks but I have to go along with it if I want to keep in contact with people, its ridiculous

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
oywhatnext
April 22, 2009 6:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I looked and couldn't figure out where to vote. I was, however, able to take a quiz to find out \"Which Douche Scent Are You?\" SO I feel like it wasn't a completely wasted effort.


BTW - I am Creamed Herring.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 6:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm not sure. I'm not even a FB member. But this frequent TOS revision and re-revision could be a good public gimmick, where they 'listen to members' & make amendments. More people now know (& join) 'bout FB because of this.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
April 22, 2009 7:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@undefined: @Etoiles: Except when only 300,000-odd people have voted at all (out of the millions of people with Facebook accounts), the odds of someone you know happening to be one of those people are... slim. I have noticed a few of my friends voting since I voted last night, probably because they saw the notice, but all of this still begs the question of why Facebook wouldn't send out a PM to everyone or something about it. I definitely didn't have that shaded message on my homepage- like a lot of people here, I'm on Facebook at least once a day, so I'd have noticed it if it was there.

You stay classy, Facebook!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
tanvach
April 22, 2009 7:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Facebook is down from your location (UK). Will not let you login.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ShadowWylde
April 22, 2009 8:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

this is what i have been seeing at the top of my home page whenever i view FB

[i634.photobucket.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Greg Sinclair
April 22, 2009 8:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

All for the revised statement...Does this count?

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 9:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You realize spammers have spambots that generate thousands of profiles on social sites like facebook daily. They cannot vote because they are long dead and forgotten spammer accounts. Also facebook refuses to remove the profiles of dead users, and a dead user cant vote but will be counted in the total I am sure.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
zimmi88
April 22, 2009 9:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

300,000 votes out of millions of users is quite pitiful, especially given people are being given the unique opportunity to determine how a social website is governed.

That said, I think they probably could do a better job of nudging people to vote. I think the only notification outside of the Facebook Governance Page was a moderately-sized text notice at the top of the news feed when you logged in about a week or so ago. Sadly, walls of text don't motivate people to vote.

But, if you're reading this, you have no excuse. Go vote! =P

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 22, 2009 10:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Among other things, it states explicitly that Facebook only claims the right to use your content to make backups, or to share it with people/apps that you approve of, or stuff like that. In other words, they don't mean \"license\" in the sense of selling your party photos to a manufacturer to slap onto t-shirts and lunchboxes.\"

That is NOT what is says. It says you information is dumped to backups, but that is not where their license stops. To quote the new TOS:

\"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (“IP content”), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account (except to the extent your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it).\"

Where does that scope their license to only using your information for backups?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Bill Moffatt
April 22, 2009 11:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sounds like a sure fire reason to stick with MySPace!

RT
www.privacy.pro.tc

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Barry Schnitt
April 22, 2009 11:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hi there, I'm a spokesman for Facebook and have commented on a few stories here. We're glad to see this story and agree with everything except the conclusion. We put a tremendous amount of work into the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and Principles and we're extremely pleased to see users supporting these documents. The suggestion that we want to keep the the old terms is absolutely incorrect.

Also, the vote doesn't need to reach 30% to be \"valid\". It needs to be 30% to be binding. Up to that point it is advisory and one of the reasons for us to hold it was to find out what users think and to take that opinion into account, even if we're not required to follow it.

I hope that helps.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Loren Fisher
April 23, 2009 12:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Facebook is being sneaky in order to manipulate the vote. What would happen if political leaders were barred from being elected in situations where less than 30% of the entire population of the country bothered to vote?

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Rolando Garza
April 23, 2009 3:46 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just cast my vote. =)

Thanks for summing it up; I did read the terms, not thoroughly, but well enough to get a better understanding.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Stephen Topp
April 23, 2009 6:49 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

You say: \"they're requiring that at least 30% of active users in the past month participate in the vote for it to count.

We don't think that's entirely unreasonable\"

I disagree entirely.

The vote was not publicized by Facebook. Unless you were a member of the group drafting the new TOS, or follow sites such as this one regularly, how is a Facebook User to know that this vote is going on?

Until last night -- when I logged on before bed -- there was nothing on Facebook to tell me there was a vote. Voting closes today, so presumably that means that I am expected to log on to Facebook this evening, thoroughly review the options, and vote accordingly.

What percentage of active users logged on this week?
How many of them were informed of the vote?
How many of them were informed in a manner that was sufficiently timely to allow them to cast an informed vote?

Facebook is trying to make themselves appear to be listening, but doing their best to ensure that the vote is not binding. It's dishonest of them.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 23, 2009 10:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just read about the vote CLOSING on an external news site for the first time (so it's too late). I don't know how much difference it would have made, but I'd have really liked to have seen some notification about this from Facebook - either as some kind of big glowing thing on my Homepage or an email. I get emails for all sorts of other things on FB, so why not something potentially so important?

It's a nice thought to let people vote, but you kind of have to tell them about it.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Nona Linford Pasquin
April 25, 2009 1:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why try to fix what isn't broken? Leave good enough alone. I didn't hear about this from facebook, my son advised me. All facebook members should get a direct message other wise it is WRONG to change something because of no interest.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
April 27, 2009 12:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

what about the many users who have been disabled? Vote against FB and get disabled.What about disabled accounts? Facebook still owns that content, that's a massive loophole they are using and abusing.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Rob Kennedy
April 29, 2009 12:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I like the new ()user voted) terms of agreement.

Protect our privacy.!!!!

Reply
");