<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Facebook Friend Invite Death Watch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:13:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zhonhe.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Facebook Zaps Application Invites</title>
		<link>http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-102019</link>
		<dc:creator>Zhonhe.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Facebook Zaps Application Invites</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 12:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-102019</guid>
		<description>[...] &#8220;Applications are now subject to daily changing (not fun) friend invite (and notifications) limits for their applications based upon several factors.&#8221; ~FaceReviews [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8220;Applications are now subject to daily changing (not fun) friend invite (and notifications) limits for their applications based upon several factors.&#8221; ~FaceReviews [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Raj Lalwani</title>
		<link>http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-55091</link>
		<dc:creator>Raj Lalwani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Mar 2008 02:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-55091</guid>
		<description>I fully agree with the sentiment of the article as well as the comment &quot;Sad Developer&quot;. We, at SocialCalendar.com, made a strategic decision of leading with a Facebook app instead of other options but we find that the Facebook rules are completely arbitrary, draconian and not even good for their own users - let alone app developers like us. It&#039;s like Outlook or Gmail telling users the maximum number of emails they can send to their friends!

I think both Facebook and app developers should stay away from forcing users one way or the other. App developers should not force users to send requests to their friends and Facebook should not constrain what users can do with their friends. Facebook has already made changes that apps can send requests only using the friend selector (so the control is with the user not app) - now they should remove the constrain on how many friends they want to interact with. Clearly, users have to be careful about not spamming their own friends - else they won&#039;t be friends anymore.

For a startup like ours, it has been a significant bump on the road. Users could put birthdays of up to 20 of their friends on their social calendar at a time (which itself is bad for the user) - now that number has gone down to 12. In theory users can come back the next day, but in practice, we find it not to be the case with most users.

Again coming back to the email metaphor, the bad actors are junk mailers (not possible in Facebook because requests must be made by the user by his own actions) or apps who force you to invite certain number of people (against the policy now - can be easily verified and app can be warned), but this ill-designed &quot;quota system&quot; is as bad as email programs telling people how many emails they can send to their friends.

Raj Lalwani
http://www.socialcalendar.com/
http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=8331309681</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fully agree with the sentiment of the article as well as the comment &#8220;Sad Developer&#8221;. We, at SocialCalendar.com, made a strategic decision of leading with a Facebook app instead of other options but we find that the Facebook rules are completely arbitrary, draconian and not even good for their own users &#8211; let alone app developers like us. It&#8217;s like Outlook or Gmail telling users the maximum number of emails they can send to their friends!</p>
<p>I think both Facebook and app developers should stay away from forcing users one way or the other. App developers should not force users to send requests to their friends and Facebook should not constrain what users can do with their friends. Facebook has already made changes that apps can send requests only using the friend selector (so the control is with the user not app) &#8211; now they should remove the constrain on how many friends they want to interact with. Clearly, users have to be careful about not spamming their own friends &#8211; else they won&#8217;t be friends anymore.</p>
<p>For a startup like ours, it has been a significant bump on the road. Users could put birthdays of up to 20 of their friends on their social calendar at a time (which itself is bad for the user) &#8211; now that number has gone down to 12. In theory users can come back the next day, but in practice, we find it not to be the case with most users.</p>
<p>Again coming back to the email metaphor, the bad actors are junk mailers (not possible in Facebook because requests must be made by the user by his own actions) or apps who force you to invite certain number of people (against the policy now &#8211; can be easily verified and app can be warned), but this ill-designed &#8220;quota system&#8221; is as bad as email programs telling people how many emails they can send to their friends.</p>
<p>Raj Lalwani<br />
<a href="http://www.socialcalendar.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.socialcalendar.com/</a><br />
<a href="http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=8331309681" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=8331309681</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sad Developer</title>
		<link>http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-54903</link>
		<dc:creator>Sad Developer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 21:09:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-54903</guid>
		<description>Rodney, we&#039;re seeing our traffic and invites cut completely in half by this change!  Its not the Facebook Friend Invite Death Watch, its the Facebook Platform Death Watch.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rodney, we&#8217;re seeing our traffic and invites cut completely in half by this change!  Its not the Facebook Friend Invite Death Watch, its the Facebook Platform Death Watch.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lonely CEO Media - Facebook Application Development and Consulting</title>
		<link>http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-54863</link>
		<dc:creator>Lonely CEO Media - Facebook Application Development and Consulting</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://facereviews.com/2008/02/29/facebook-friend-invite-death-watch/#comment-54863</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;What&#8217;s Forgotten With New Changes to Invites&lt;/strong&gt;

Recently, Facebook&#8217;s changes to invitations have sparked some interesting points (mainly that Facebook is punishing developers). We&#8217;ve already said that Facebook is doing what Ben Bernanke should- curbing inflation for the sake of platform&amp;...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>What&#8217;s Forgotten With New Changes to Invites</strong></p>
<p>Recently, Facebook&#8217;s changes to invitations have sparked some interesting points (mainly that Facebook is punishing developers). We&#8217;ve already said that Facebook is doing what Ben Bernanke should- curbing inflation for the sake of platform&amp;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

