Most of the people I hear complaining about Facebook hate it, but don't hate it enough to delete their accounts.

Ask them why, and it's always the same bullshit: "muh frienz 'n fam'ly!"

I had friends, family, and fans on Facebook. My wife is still on that site.

I didn't let that stop me. Network effects are no excuse.

@starbreaker I quit facebook too, but the network effects aren't to be ignored. FB have been very successful at instigating themselves into the center of social activity for a lot of folks, and asking people to give up those connections is a big ask.

Also, it's particularly harder for people who are already being asked to do a lot of emotional labor to maintain social connections. Quitting FB is much harder if you're the "social representative" for your family.

@cercerilla @starbreaker
I've never had a facebook account, but I often rely on my friends who do have facebook accounts to relay critical university-related information to me from a facebook.. group? or sth...

Even some official announcements, when students and not employees are responsible for making them, are on facebook instead of e-mail, website, or RSS. Many things that used to have websites now only have a facebook page.
Surviving on university without using facebook is hard.

@Wolf480pl @cercerilla @starbreaker This is another reason why a Facebook account is so useful. It's not only huge in social connections, but organisational connections as well.

A great deal of grassroots activity within municipalities is organised via FB as well; not being involved there can mean you no longer can connect with other activists and advocates.

@ayachan @cercerilla @Wolf480pl

As useful as FB might be for activists, organizing on FB makes me nervous from an opsec standpoint. I don't believe that anything is truly private on Facebook. Not even private groups.

@starbreaker @Wolf480pl @cercerilla Also, look at it this way, Matthew:

Let’s say everyone in your town hung out at “Burgers & Malts” for connecting, but you decided “Shakes & Cakes” was better for all the right reasons. You may get a friend or two to join you, but the AnarchoPunk Rebel Alliance will still only meet at B&M

This is due to the social nature of humans; they gather in groups and tend to favour familiarity, so once something is established, that's how it tends to remain.

@ayachan @cercerilla @Wolf480pl That's not a bad analogy, but I would suggest that having everybody congregate in one location makes connection unnecessarily difficult because there are too many people trying to have conversations.

@starbreaker @ayachan @cercerilla maybe this is an introvert vs extrovert thing?

@Wolf480pl @starbreaker @cercerilla Not really. That whole entire concept is misleading anyway...and it promotes a social fallacy that only helps push a "normal" ideal on people.

The truth is that all humans are social. It's a part of their species makeup. Both biology and psychology will back me up on this.

This is a matter of not recognising--or acknowledging--the social element of leaving everyone in your life behind.

@ayachan @starbreaker @cercerilla I feel best with few people around me. I get tired when there's too many people around. I hate parties. Call it whatever you like. Call me insane. But don't try to tell me that I actually enjoy lots-of-people-in-one-place when I don't.

@Wolf480pl @starbreaker @cercerilla I never said anything of the sort. What I said was that the "introvert versus extrovert" argument is misleading and a social fallacy.

Some of us prefer social interactions differently from others. But it's very nuanced and the I vs E argument creates a binary where there is no binary to be had.