Comments on: NY Times fearmongers the persistence of content of Facebook http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/ Thu, 20 Nov 2008 23:07:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: FaceReviews: Facebook News and Facebook Applications http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-44256 FaceReviews: Facebook News and Facebook Applications Tue, 12 Feb 2008 22:39:53 +0000 http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-44256 [...] we ran a piece chastising the NY Times for fearmongering on Facebook’s account deletion policies. To recap, we essentially took the [...] […] we ran a piece chastising the NY Times for fearmongering on Facebook’s account deletion policies. To recap, we essentially took the […]

]]> By: Blake Robinson http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-43781 Blake Robinson Tue, 12 Feb 2008 06:11:23 +0000 http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-43781 Shucking aside, while terms of service might, at times, be somewhat draconian, the point is that users agree to comply with them when signing-up. Which is to say, that when you signup for whatever service, you're entering into a sort of contract that says you agree to comply with the terms set forth by the company in exchange for the services rendered by the product. Companies (and I'm not pegging Facebook here, because I believe their terms are perfectly reasonable and acceptable) sometimes have shady terms, but users seldom notice them until it's too late, because consumers infrequently check the terms of service prior to consumption. I'm not saying it's cool, but I do believe that it's ethically sound both from the perspectives of business and decency. Companies make their TOS available and it's up to you to see whether or not you can live with them prior to making use of what they're offering. If you don't do that, any suffering that befalls you is really the result of your own negligence and not the fault of the company whose intentions were transparent from the outset. Shucking aside, while terms of service might, at times, be somewhat draconian, the point is that users agree to comply with them when signing-up. Which is to say, that when you signup for whatever service, you’re entering into a sort of contract that says you agree to comply with the terms set forth by the company in exchange for the services rendered by the product.

Companies (and I’m not pegging Facebook here, because I believe their terms are perfectly reasonable and acceptable) sometimes have shady terms, but users seldom notice them until it’s too late, because consumers infrequently check the terms of service prior to consumption.

I’m not saying it’s cool, but I do believe that it’s ethically sound both from the perspectives of business and decency. Companies make their TOS available and it’s up to you to see whether or not you can live with them prior to making use of what they’re offering.

If you don’t do that, any suffering that befalls you is really the result of your own negligence and not the fault of the company whose intentions were transparent from the outset.

]]> By: You Shuck http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-43741 You Shuck Tue, 12 Feb 2008 05:10:27 +0000 http://facereviews.com/2008/02/11/ny-times-fearmongers-the-persistence-of-content-of-facebook/#comment-43741 Wah, metawhining is so cool. Stop being a fucking douche nozzle and understand that shitty user terms like that of Facebook is a problem, too. Wah, metawhining is so cool. Stop being a fucking douche nozzle and understand that shitty user terms like that of Facebook is a problem, too.

]]>