The Problems With Friends Lists

December 11, 2009 · Comments

friends list I’m trimming a few of my friends in Facebook. Not a ton, but a few folks who are wonderful for wanting to follow me, but who I haven’t really interacted with in well over a year. (Quick note: none of the people in the picture to the left were being trimmed. I just took a snap of where I was in the list.)

The Emotions Around the Data

What strikes me is that this is a potentially emotional exchange to what should be a simple choice of data management. Think about it. If you remove someone as a friend, it says something more than just a line of data, doesn’t it? There’s an emotional transference. Some of you will argue that there shouldn’t be, or that someone should get over it, or whatever, but for the most part, I’d say that people who use social networks extensively (versus people trying to plumb the system for business purposes) would feel a little something, should they find themselves defriended.

It says you’re not important. It says you’re no longer relevant. It says you’re no longer entitled to a more intimate view and sharing. There are lots of potential combinations to feel when one is unfollowed or defriended.

And yet, the decision is almost always unemotional in nature to the person doing the trimming. Barring little arguments, it’s usually a momentary judgment of, “I’m not really interacting with this person, so I don’t see the big deal.”

Right?

So there’s a disparity between what the act means to the person removing versus the person who feels removed. And yet, what’s the value of keeping every name listed that you’ve ever friended? Is there some historic quality? Does it mean something different?

Clustering and Other Sorting Mechanisms

In a way, Facebook is flawed in this way. Unless you work your news stream through a series of filters (I do), you see ALL friends as equal. There’s no real clustering that says “I’m spending more time and interest on these friends,” and yet, that’s how we do what we do as humans. True?

What about proximity (as per my other post)? It strikes me that it would be useful to pop in some location data and have Facebook clump up my friends for the region (especially as I’m typing this from Paris, France).

It’s All A Strange Synthetic

Our friend behavior matches what software developers have designed. It’s not exactly written by sociologists. In some ways, the software forces us to behave in certain ways. In others, it opens up new ways to think and build relationships. It’s a mix of benefit and drawback (like all innovation, I suspect).

There’s more to this. I’m only just starting to see it, but I’m also acutely aware of what needs fixing in social databases.

You?

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Tagged as: , , , , ,

ChrisBrogan.com runs on the Thesis Theme for WordPress

Thesis WordPress theme

Thesis is the search engine optimized WordPress theme of choice for serious online publishers. If you’re a blogger who doesn’t understand a lot of PHP, Thesis will give a ton of functionality without having to alter any code. For the advanced, Thesis has incredible customization possibilities via Thesis hooks.

With so many design options, you can use the template over and over and never have it look like the same site. The theme is robust and flexible enough not only to accommodate a site like ChrisBrogan.com, but also to enable the site to run far more efficiently than it ever has before.

  • Jerry Talley
    Chris...somehow I managed to find your page, thank God...question: On my Facebook chat area I have 2 lists, and simply want to add the confirmed friends of both to make their names visible, whether online or offline, to the booton bar of the page. Gone to Help Center. No help at all. Asked about 30-40 persons in discussion areas. No help at all. I'm no idiot by any means, but if you could provide an answer that will result in success, please offer it in layman's terms. Thanks much,Chris, in advance.....jerryT.
  • Jerry Talley
    I've had my HP pavillion PC lap-top for maybe a month or so...I'm no idiot, but when it comes to the Facebook chat issue, I have 2 lists...I want to transfer the names of those confirmed friends to the visible name friend area at bottof screen...trust me, gone to Help Center and asked at least 50 people - with no accomplishment or success. You are obviously an intelligentt man, so here I go with asking YOU....can you please put it into layman's terms....if it works, I'll be fine from there. Thanks so much in advance....JerryT.
  • Jerry Talley
    On fabook, and when going to my friends' list, I've tried innumerous efforts to transfer those friends to a visible view of them at the lower part of the screen...trust me, gone to Help center and asked everyone possible - no accomplishment. You're onbviously an intelligent person, so can you give me advice - I'm not an idiot, but please offer it in layman's terms.....and I thank you very much in advance.
  • I knocked off about 30% of my Facebook "friends" list in 2009. Almost all of that comes from the way I use Facebook now, versus the way I used it in 2007.

    When I first started on Facebook, I signed up for work. All of my initial friends were people I either shared an office with or had interacted with on a corporate level.

    Until my mom joined, and we started to play Scrabble.

    But I take varying approaches to various platforms. I'll interact with anybody on Twitter (I might not follow you back, but I'll still have a discussion with you), email, or the various blogs I contribute to.

    But if we're in the same general area and there's pretty much no conceivable way I'd call you and ask you to join me for a casual beer, I'm probably not friends with you on Facebook. And you'd probably already know if you fit in the "let's go have a beer" group, and if you're not, you really shouldn't be offended.

    Maybe the real issue is Facebook shouldn't call connections "friends" - because there IS an emotional implication tied to the word.
  • marryroy01
    Many people have a voyeur mentality these days anyway. They may just want to see what's going on but be a fly on the wall at the same time. I think that's perfectly fine.Since I view Facebook as a place where I have the opportunity to really get to know someone, see their face, know what's going on in their day-to-day life.

    jeux ps2
  • Great info. I already do most of this but I am going to check the one’s that I missed. Definitely going to send this to all my Facebook friends. It’s a must read.
  • Way to simplify this issue Chris!
    In my work as a professional musician the natural (and "cool") tendency is to collect gear much in the way people on social networks collect "friends."

    I eventually set myself a principle, that if I haven't used a piece of equipment in 2 years I will never use it.

    In any application, when the tools go unused they not only create clutter but often inhibit the use of other more productive tools!
  • stephaniegraham
    Joseph. I like that school of thought about the 2years unused. I am going
    to apply that to alot of things as I clean up my workspace, and get ready
    for 2010. The same applies to social network friends.
  • Thanks Stephanie, I wish you a very productive and efficient 2010!
  • stephaniegraham
    At times I do go through all my connections, friends and followers and see who is who and some of the people I do delete. For me I want to make have true relationships with people. Not just some random that wants to be my friend because he thinks I am pretty. LOL It comes in handy to have the real relationships. Sure you can build the relationships up, but hey not everyone needs to be in your network.
    I have these talks with girlfriends of mine about ex-dates, or boyfriends if we should keep them linked into our personal public lives and its a difficult thing to decide. Hmmmm All in all some people I do keep because you never know when you will need them and others not because its not necessary.

    Does that make sense :)
  • arse
    motherfucker
  • arse
    motherfucker
  • arse
    you motherfukcer
  • I just had to place this comment because after reading this post you have answered the vast majority of questions that I had in my mind about this particular topic.

    Thank You

    Mark
  • thomsinger
    I only link to people whom I have shared a cup of coffee, a meal or a beer (there are some exceptions) as I have found that to blindly like to anyone is like holding up a printed phone book and claim it is your network. After sitting with someone and having a real conversation I believe there is a foundation on which more could come later.
  • Yep, software makes us do things differently. some times the things a tool like Twitter forces us to do helps us think differently and other times certain limitations hold us back from really making use of the tools.

    Filtering, grouping, etc... is KEY, but I wish there was a more simple way to have it done for you. i.e. the grouping by location. it would be great if Facebook just did that. facebook could also group by high school, work, etc...

    I like Twitter lists in concept, but i seem to shy away from the public nature of them for some reason. i use seesmic and do grouping in the app - this way no one takes something the wrong way.

    At the end of the day "friends" on the web and friends in real life go through cycles. one year you might be in constant contact with a person. the next year they might move so you interact much less. on the web one year you might make a connection with someone for a specific reason that keeps you in close communication/interaction. the next year that reason might go away so you end up interacting less.

    All that said, when deep and meaningful relationships are created all lists go out the window. Those are the folks you just live and go through life with. You can pick up where ever you left off even if 5 years past between meeting.

    good stuff Chris.

    http://twitter.com/franswaa
  • I can't help but think you could have done something differently, Chris.

    To the casual onlooker, it looks like you're saying "Thanks for getting me to where I am today, but I no longer need you because we haven't spoken/interacted in a while".

    Does that mean you have to "get rid" of people? Why not suggest they move over to the fan page? Or use your community to petition Facebook to look at its user experience (heck, it worked for Jeff Jarvis and Dell).

    I may not read Trust Agents for a few months, or even over a year. So should I throw it out because I haven't interacted with it for so long, or keep it nearby in case I want to dip back in, say "Hello" and gain knowledge from it?

    Make sense? :)
  • I have been dropped from Facebook for a few reasons. I post too much stuff. I guess I take the over sharing thing to the new level. I do tend to warn people that I tend to be an over sharer and I try to share stuff which is relevant to Detroit, Red Wings or finding a job in this cruel economy. I figure I can help out.

    I also tend to use Facebook for crowdsourcing which I am NOT sure if that is the case for everyone else. I have a great source of friends who are really tuned into the sports I love and adore so this is a great resource.

    I know I have been dropped and I also know why people stay. I guess when you are trimming your list you have to think of the good vs. bad. I know I have been dropped from at least 3 people's lists because of over sharing. I guess it is a personal decision.
  • I didn't get cut. That makes me feel special. Well, maybe non-un-important.
  • Actually, I do find it painful to remove friends. Sometimes someone I've friended states beliefs that are just too far outside my comfort zone. I like being exposed to a wide variety of beliefs, but I bristle when someone tries to force theirs on me...and they are likely to get unfriended if it happens more than a few times. But I'm never comfortable doing it,
  • Kind of true for any relationship really. If you end a romantic relationship or business relationship, it always hits the person that is being severed harder then the person severing.
  • I don't typically unfriend anybody on Facebook. I have lots of real life friends on there, and several connections that I've met online through Twitter, et al. I have set up groups on there to help sort them out, but I agree that it's not intuitive or feaure-rich enough to mimic how we treat these relationships in real life.

    On the bright side of that, it forces me to see the goings on of several people I don't know at all, except as some social networking contact. Every once in a while, I can interject a thought to them. Who knows where that can lead?

    I have a few blogs and businesses, and set up fan pages for them. But I made the facebook URL to my personal page the name of my main business in the very beginning. And they don't let you change it! So it looks like, for now, I'll just keep adding new contacts to my personal profile. It's all good.

    Bob
  • With regards to:

    -- There’s no real clustering that says “I’m spending more time and interest on these friends,” and yet, that’s how we do what we do as humans. --

    That actually could be a cluster easily put together on Facebook or Twitter. If you've got 20 or 50 friends that you spend the most time with / have the most interest in, then a "list" for those folks on Facebook would work very well. More and more third party devices let you do this kind of thing with Twitter as well. These filters definitely let you streamline the info coming your way.
  • Kate Grace
    This is an interesting question and I had to respond. Most of the people I know don't use Facebook and I've got a primarily family circle. I've deleted three folks so far from Facebook. One I removed because I didn't care for the type of language she used, it was crude and crass, very unappealing. Two others I removed because they simply didn't post anything. And when I first removed them they both contacted me and said, 'hey, I see I'm not a friend anymore', so I sheepishly readded them. After a time and not seeing any posts from them I just got a bit creeped out that they were watching but not sharing anything. So I removed them again. I don't like how it feels to be watched. One in fact, made a comment by email about a post I'd made and drew a conclusion about me based on that post. I didn't like the 'uninformed' and judgmental conclusion she made based on something I was sharing that was meant to be fun.
  • I know you're speaking about Facebook, Chris, but in much the same way, being dropped or even blocked by someone on Twitter can also teach us something that we would totally accept in real-life social settings but that we sometimes don't want to accept online: that there are consequences to what you say.

    The only time I've ever been blocked by someone on Twitter came as a result of my making what I thought was an innocent, jokey comment, that was taken the wrong way by someone who thought it made assumptions about them I had no business making. I thought I was "friends" with this person, but in fact had to admit afterward that a dozen tweets and a couple blog comments doesn't make you "friends" with anyone.

    The end result was that the person didn't want to pursue even a casual acquaintance and there was nothing I could do or say to change that fact.

    Was I misunderstood? Absolutely. Was the other person justified in not wanting to listen to my excuses? Absolutely. If the same comment had been made in a face-to-face scenario, would the misunderstanding have occurred? Highly unlikely.

    It was a painful lesson for me to learn, but one I think we all need to be mindful of.
  • elainegantzwright
    Whether you call is friending or following -- frolicking or fraternizing -- when it comes down to it, doesn't all social interaction come down to "cliques."?
  • For lots of people, yes. For most humans, yes. And yet, some folks are more inclusive.
  • Chris,
    Re: your observation that "Facebook is flawed in this way. Unless you work your news stream through a series of filters (I do), you see ALL friends as equal. There’s no real clustering that says “I’m spending more time and interest on these friends.""

    To some extent, this is what the Live Feed and View News Feed features attempt to do: to quote FB, the Live Feed displays a sub-set of updates based on "a variety of factors including how many friends have liked and commented on it and how likely you are to interact with that story." FB hasn't done a great job helping users make the distinction, as is clear from the many posts I've seen wondering what the differences are.

    I do agree with you and was just thinking about this last week as I thought about unfollowing someone on Twitter. It wasn't that I was concerned about the person feeling put out, as much as I wanted to understand whether or not someone who really cared about the quality of their follower list would want to know why they were being unfollowed.
  • I think the difficulty, as many people already have mentioned, is what we use our various social networks for. I use facebook to keep track of people that I am currently close to or have been at some point in the past. There are friends on there from elementary school who I rarely interact with, but I now have a contact option should I wish to reach out with them at some point. Case in point. I sang with a group in high school, and after receiving a group message regarding the death of our choir teacher, we decided that this christmas we would all get together for a reunion in his honor. This would not have been possible if we didn't have a system that allows us to reach out to the members of this group in an interface they actually use, even though I haven't talk with many of them in years.

    The difficulty I see is with the limited filter options for the newsfeed. I want to have a better UI to decide who shows up in the newsfeed. I appreciate the new attempted algorithm to choose a limited number to occur in the newsfeed (vs. the live feed), but ultimately I see it as a flawed system for two reasons: 1. I haven't found a very good way to filter when I access my news through an app outside of facebook. 2. there are some people who I don't interact with on facebook often, but I'm interested in what they post. I want to a good UI to be able to choose that. My sister, for example, is someone that I talk to on the phone all the time, but if she posts a picture of her new baby, I want to know, even though we don't interact all that much on facebook.

    I think the difficulty is that facebook has become an address book for many of us. I don't want to lose that functionality, but i want better choices regarding who I listen to and pay attention to in that address book.
  • I believe the experience is different for people that have smaller lists. With 5,000+ "friends" I can imagine that "defriending" is a necessary process to make the tool useful for YOU and not just your audience.

    My experience is a lot different. I would say that I know or have met 95% of the people on my friends list. The 5% that I haven't met, I've accepted on my list because I'd like to know them "on a social/personal" level or have future plans to meet them. Then, there are 1 or 2 businesses that use the FB personal profile instead of the fan page (for whatever reason). Bottom line is that I know exactly who's on my friends list. It's a manageable # that is much less than 500 or 300.

    I use the "lists" feature to indicate if I know them personally or professionally. And now the new Facebook privacy feature (for status messages) allows me to post messages specifically to my "strictly professional" list. Previously, I'd restricted my status messages from this group because I primarily use Facebook for social (as in socializing) purposes. I use my company FB page to distribute messages pertaining to my business or my industry. I like it this way, as there is little confusion and drama around my friends list. LOL. But I can imagine that my process would drive someone with 1,000+ "friends" crazy. But this works quite well for me. I use Facebook as a tool to connect with people that I know or will get to know on a personal level. And I plan to keep it that way.

    I can't wait to hear your additional thoughts re: social databases.
  • rodneypayne
    Great post! I, like many of my friends and (non fan-page) clients are very careful who they add to their friend network. There's a number of reasons for this, including professional appearance. Facebook's system is highly dependent on the friend network. As a result, the platform is much more intimate than most other forms of social media and this social graph is responsible for at least some of Facebook's rapid growth.

    Removing friends, however, has almost become taboo! You're dead right with the offline effects and emotions attached to what should be very simple data management. Luckily, I haven't been removed by any of my contacts... yet. Although, I wouldn't be quick to notice if I was removed by someone on the outside of my friend network because of Facebook's clever algorithm that determines news feed displays. Even if it were published to feeds that 'Rodney was removed', I probably wouldn't see it and I wouldn't notice their lack of posts.

    Personally, I'm very careful in how I use status updates and I recommend that clients are mindful not to broadcast unwanted information.
  • I disagree - you can sort your friends in lists and I see no reason why you should delete friends you don't interact with. Me, I'm loss-averse :)
  • When you have nearly 5000 friends in Facebook, you have to trim somewhere to add newer "real" friends you meet and engage with. It's a problem I have that you might not at present, but the premise is still valid.
  • A blunt reminder that I'm a social failure. :)

    But I see your point. It kinda reminds me of a movie I watched once with a shock jock in his apprenticeship years. His radio station manager promoted him with a demand: "you wanna be boss? go and fire your friend!"
  • With unlimited ability to add friends, I agree with zamolxis - let your network grow and use sorting tools to manage the hose. Seems like the Trust Agent thing to do, no?

    So this becomes a Facebook-specific problem with a cap on 5000 friends. For Chris Brogan, this becomes a scarcity issue and it shouldn't be. But then Facebook is only recently expanding out of its own walled garden, so maybe this will change too like the new push to gently push users to keep their profiles public.
  • Amy
    I think Facebook used to have a feature that allowed one to tailor their feed (ie: See more of Friend A and see less of Friend B.) It was nice while it lasted.
  • Chris-
    Interesting topic. I don't see the point of removing people that are in my facebook network due to lack of interaction as being part of someones life stream in itself is interaction. Not hitting "like" or commenting on their post is a nice way to engage them, but having your updates in their stream is still meaningful.

    I am always amazed by how facebook has become an icebreaker to live realtime conversations in real life. "Hey congratulations on becoming an Uncle, your niece is adorable." because they may have seen me post a picture on facebook. They did not comment or "like" it but the exchange was still there.

    If I had to guess, you may feel like you are not interacting with some people as a result of having such an enormous network that makes it impossible to keep up with everyone's updates and may assume they are experience Chirs Brogan the same way. But you could be 1 of 50 of their friends and adding value to their day without even realizing it.

    That said, I am all for getting rid of people I don't want in any part of my life and that is a good emotional feeling to delete them.

    http://steponesocialmedia.blogspot.com
  • You're completely right that it becomes emotional - all relationships carry some emotion, but as others have noted here, the word "friend" is completely loaded. Think of kids - one day, your own child is likely to be crying because "Billy said he's not gonna be my friend anymore!" So, this is one of the earliest key emotional touchstones we have in relationships... and even though friends on a social networks should "seem" different, it still carries that hint of what we've known forever. The flip side of that, of course, is that we love the positive connotation of having hundreds or thousands of people who want our friendship... even though we also know that it's not the same thing as real-world friendship.

    Our friend behaviors do more than match what the software developers dictate - they're impacted by all sorts of societal norms and pressures. It's possible to match one to the other - you can use a network just for real world friends, after all - but for anyone trying to grow a network or just interested in connecting with lots of fascinating people, it's gonna cause problems. I'm not sure where the solutions are, either, because I suspect you can't "solve" emotions via technology. But certainly there will be ways to smooth some of the rougher edges.
  • "In some ways, the software forces us to behave in certain ways." This remind me of Lessig's book "Code" mantra "Code is law"
  • nolafilm
    Chris, I think part of this comes down to the actual reasons people have friended you. I connected with you on LinkedIn earlier this year after reading your blog, and then realized, hey, I can get a tremendous amount out of this "relationship" with Chris by subscribing to his email blasts and his blog's rss feed, buying his books, and attending conferences where he's a speaker or organizer.

    when i met you at the inbound marketing summit in foxboro a couple months ago i was thinking, wow, for a marketing and social networking rockstar, that chris brogan is really a nice, down to earth guy. but it never occurred to me to friend you on facebook. i guess because i get what i need out of our connection via the stuff i mentioned above.

    one day, sure, if we actually did get to know each other pretty well, and it made sense, I'd welcome a facebook friendship with you, but for now "our relationship" as it is works great for me - i get everything i need from you via your emails, blog posts, videos, books, speaking engagements, etc., and you get a supporter and evangelist for your efforts. (and a friend in New Orleans if you're ever down this way).

    the last thing i'd add is that while you are incredibly down to earth and personable, your celebrity status has helped make "the idea of Chris Brogan" or "Chris Brogan the brand" bigger in some ways than the actual guy. and people who don't know you personally see you on facebook and naturally want to be your friend.

    but it almost seems like they'd be better served on facebook in this scenario if you created a Page, totally separate from, and in addition to your main profile (assuming Facebook would cut you some slack there) that spoke more to the reasons these people were friending you in the first place. That way they could sign up as FANS instead of friends, and you could have an unlimited number of them. The relationships here would also be a little better defined and everyone would hopefully get more out of them.

    and you wouldn't feel bad about cutting some of your "friends" who are actually more like fans than friends.
  • This is a good point and reminds me of an article I read in Wired a while back. The main point of the article is that social networking sites do not (yet) follow the lifeline of real relationships. The author proposed a system where the icons of your friends would shrink over time and eventually disappear if there is not some sort of interaction. An automated process would remove the emotional aspects of defriending or being defriended and.
  • Chris, one thing that I find to be more than remarkable - is that you actually DO directly and regularly interact - that is you really "practice what you preach" - not sure how you are able to pull that off... with so many "followers and fans"... maybe you have some kind of an "embedded computer chip" : ) ? - but, however you do that, I am always appreciative of the communication and advice. thank you for that! J
  • Murray Rob Roy McGregor
    Had a similar discussion with Julien a couple of weeks ago when he was in Ottawa.

    I try to keep my friends in Facebook and my business connections in LinkedIn. There is always some crossover. That's fine because who wants to totally pidgeon-hole the people in your life.

    Facebook fan pages are good for politicians, entertainers, artists, high-profile people. If my networks ever expand, maybe I'll try one.
  • I like to keep my friends and business contacts apart using Facebook for firends and Twitter for the others. That doesn't stop Tweeties becoming friends. It's just that sometimes you want to gripe and maybe even swear a bit, both of which are big Twitter turn offs, not a side you really want to expose to potential colleagues before you have even met them.
  • Reminds me of the Seinfeld episode "#1 on Speed Dial" .. don't assign too much to other org plans
  • Any relationship is a two way street. The problem may be that you have rules for what constitutes a "worthy" connection, on each social media platform but you're not doing a good job of communicating those expectations.

    Many people who are new to social media are still learning about the difference between a Twitter follower and Facebook friend and a Linked-In connection. When you place links to all three of your profiles next to each other in your footer, you are inviting people to "connect" with you equally using these three platforms. Yet you offer no guidance as to what your criteria are for each. Ask yourself - how is somebody who is new to this supposed to know whether or not they are really invited you connect with you on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn?

    For example, everyone is invited to follow me on Twitter, Facebook is for people I've met, and LinkedIn is for people I've worked with. What are your rules and why? Are you being clear about differences?

    Best,
    Glen
  • A basic marketing tenant is that it's a lot more cost effective to get more out of your current customers than to find new ones. I think the same is true of friends. Friends have friends who have friends. The only way I'd unfriend someone is if they proved to be someone I did not want to be associated with. I might hide them, or filter them, but I wouldn't unfriend them. I think that if a study were to be done, there's a direct correlation between earning potential and numbers of friends since they represent a sphere of influence that generally translates into money somewhere along the way.
  • ahockley
    As trivial as it seems, I think a lot of the problem is the issue with the word "friend" being used... the term "friend" means something, and that something has emotions attached.
  • I've encountered this problem quite a few times throughout my own journey with Facebook. It's not like I've ever neared the 5000 friends limit but I just don't want to speak to some of the same people I spoke to a year ago because of various reasons.

    It's easy for me (like you said) to delete them because I just don't feel that we're really friends anymore or that there's any connectivity being experienced between that person and I. It gets awkward though when you find out that the person you removed still wants to be friends with you. If someone resends a friend request to me should I assume they are looking to connect again? Or does it just mean they want another name on a list?
  • @nrek...I love your reply. I have been trying to get interaction on my Facebook Fan Page by asking how we measure the success of a Fan Page. The reason for my question is to spark interaction. If people are unwilling or unable to interact within a social medium why have it. I am looking for conversation not just waving at people as they pass by and saying "look at me".
  • stephmajercik
    I agree with this post completely. Just last year I went through my friends and removed about 300 people whom I no longer interacted with or never even spoke to in the first place, and to me it was no big deal.. Yet when I go to write on someone's wall or go to view their profile and find that I am no longer friends with them, I am usually offended, but afterwards realize that I never did interact with them and there really is no purpose to the "friendship."

    I think for many young people, its all about how many friends they have and not necessarily about the quality of the friendships. Eventually you reach a point though where you realize, whats the point of having 600+ friends when you regularly interact with about 100?
  • I think there are some major differences between Facebook and most other social networking platforms. Facebook has become so much more personal and friend-oriented then anything else, which is why there is stronger emotion around being "defriended" on Facebook as opposed to someone "unfollowing" you on Twitter.

    I would recommend using a Facebook profile for only close friends so you dont have to worry about different sharing permissions for different people. If you are using Facebook for a business then you should be using a Facebook Fan Page instead of a profile. Then you can easily seperate personal "friends" from "fans", who are really the equivalent of "followers".

    A "follower" is a person that is not emotional important to you, but a "friend" is. It all depends on the language used by the site which builds the culture around how the site builds its userbase.

    If you are using a social network that specifically uses the term "friend". Use with caution because emotions will be involved.
  • This issue is not unique to social media, but can be found throughout business in general, and is basically an issue of prioritization. There are a number of things in my business that are important...but only some of those are VERY important...and only some of those are VERY VERY important.

    If this were not a social media situation, but a business situation, the same dynamics would occur. While you were assuring me that my particular project was important to you, meanwhile you'd be thinking in the back of your mind that you have to get rid of me quickly so that you can work on Charlene Li's project.

    Most of the social media tools reflect this business reality, and allow you to befriend everyone but put selected people on special lists so that you can really pay attention to them. Unfortunately, Facebook puts a limit on the total number of friends that you can have, which sets up a barrier that causes people with many connections to engage in list pruning. Facebook's workaround is to set up a fan page for yourself, but I know how you feel about fan pages... :)
  • I think the big problem right now is that Facebook is still set up to handle friendships in college, allowing you to keep in touch with your friends as they go from class to class. As it's become more of a networking tool, Facebook's developers need to figure out a new way to make it easier to use it as just that.

    There's a reason it's called "adding a friend" - I'd say that we need to think long and hard about how we plan to use the tool and then think about who you are adding. I used to get worried about people who unfriended me, but I finally realized that if one thing that I posted or said caused this action, then they probably weren't friends with me in the first place, were they?
  • Well, especially as it applies to Facebook, I think they're trying to figure that out with friends vs fans. Frankly, I'm having trouble with that paradigm though. I guess its easier to direct people to the fan page when you have thousands of followers but it seems to me that its kinda like saying, "You don't really rate for my friends list... but you can be a fan!" I don't know...

    @jtrigsby
  • beley
    Facebook needs a grouping function similar to Twitter that will not only let you control your privacy settings (which you can already do, and should) but also to control what updates you see and who you interact with.

    Up until recently I kept Facebook strictly for family and very close friends. By "very close" I mean people with whom I interact with face-to-face on multiple occasions throughout the year. People I have dinner with, buy a drink, watch a football game, etc. Real friends.

    But then I started getting friend requests from people that follow me on Twitter, business colleagues, clients, etc. I created groups so some people can't see my family photos or other sensitive stuff, but there's still a disconnect between "real" friends and acquaintances.

    Facebook needs a different way to connect with acquaintances of associates than just shoving all updates in the same feeds. I haven't really explored the options available yet, but I'd love the ability to set a default "home" view (to just my close friends and family) but still be able to view others anytime I want to.

    I don't necessarily think there's anything wrong with connecting with people you "kinda know" on Facebook... in fact I really like it. I've become real friends with several people I probably wouldn't have ever really interacted with had it not been for Facebook or Twitter.

    I have yet to "unfriend" anyone yet, but I'm sure the time will come... and I agree that there would be some disappointment if I noticed, for instance, that you (Chris) unfriended me. I may not immediately assume anything, but I would definitely wonder WHY you did it.
  • skstewart
    I carefully consider friend request on Facebook - especially my personal account. On that account I don't accept every request. On my public account, I accept nearly all requests.

    I think there needs to be a way to cluster folks together for a variety of reasons - geographically, interest, and so on.

    This will be a great sociology study for someone.
  • I never defriend people, unless it's twitter and they aren't following me back. I just use software that helps me monitor my real friends instead. That is what that software if for. It's precisely what you said. I don't want to offend others. I'm not worried about them being mad at ME, I'd just rather not communicate to them that they aren't important. Who the hell do I think I am? And honestly, I think the people that make a big deal about defreinding others and going down to like 100 fiends are a little egocentric. Well, a lot egocentric. It's like inviting 100 people to a party, and then deciding last minute you only want 10 there. Kinda selfish and insensitive. But that is just my two cents. In the grand scheme of things with the billions of people on the planet, if you aren't contributing to the good in the world, you are a nobody.
  • Oh snap, I am sure to get the trim! *biting nails*
  • Social Media is designed to help people make lot of friends, but it does little to help us manage and filter the streams of information.

    Your in the arena, why not relevancy algorithm that sifts through your social profiles and routes that info back to an ajax based console for replying and such. You could role it in beta having it only cater to the major sites. A one-page and your current standing in the industry would get you all the funding you would need.
  • Honestly, I see nothing wrong with "friends" not interacting with me as much as I'd like. I'm totally OK with one-way communication in most cases. For people in biz dev, I'm sure they'll agree.

    Many people have a voyeur mentality these days anyway. They may just want to see what's going on but be a fly on the wall at the same time. I think that's perfectly fine.
  • alejandrorecio
    If the word “unfriend” was voted by oxford’s dictionary word of the year, it must mean that it has become as common as adding friends. I guess facebook is starting to become more private, people are no longer hungry for more friends and are learning that there are some things you only want to share with your real friends and if strangers want to get to know you, theirs always tweeter.
  • Some of this is the trouble with the public show of friends lists. In IM clients, you can group people easily - make new lists for main contacts, friends, family, it's all simple, and no one ever sees your lists. It's like playing with filters in TweetDeck is now.

    Part of the trouble with Fb, in this regard, is that friends list are one-tier and public. If someone disappears from the list, it means they're just gone, not relegated. I think people would take it a bit better if there were some kind of "archived friends" list, or even no public friends list at all. Removing a person from your public list of supporters is, whether anyone else notices or not, a public sleight on their name.

    I'm aware that's a stretch, but it's still there.

    People have learned to deal with being defriended much better over the years. The days of lost relationships over that one secret MySpace page appropriate to a very small clique are mostly over - and if they're not, people need to just wake up a bit and think about what their online relationships actually mean.
  • I didn't read through all the comments, so perhaps someone has already mentioned this, but Chris, you pretty much nailed what needs to be the future of such social media -- employing sociologists or social anthropologists in the development side and data collection and sharing when building social networks. i work for a large classical music label and distributor, and we employ musicologists who help us sort and organize metadata in the way that our audience behaves with it.

    They are called "Friends" lists for a more than a marketing reason, psychologically they put you in a category that does have an emotional layer to its name and meaning. So yes, when you are accepted, you are "friended," but oddly the user who removes you considers it "de-listing" and not "de-friending." Perhaps that's why there is a bit of hesitation when adding people to top friends or sorting them into different lists. There should be. My hope is that we don't lose the personal connection social media gives us. It's an interesting opportunity for developers and I, for one, am looking forward to participating in the continued humanizing of the experiences in the social sphere.
  • bkjrecruiter
    Chris- Great article... The few times I have been de-friended, I just told myself.. I need to do a better job. It is actually a "gift" in reality...

    We actually are doing people a favor if we "unfollow" or "unfriend" folks, becuase sub-contiously we are sending a message... (Add value)

    Thanks for the post...

    Best,
    Brian-
  • cathmary
    For me, part of the issue stems from the use of the word "friend" in networks like FB. IMHO, we Americans use the term "friend" too loosely and then we have to categorize with other terms like BFF and the like. ("Friend", to me implies inner circle -- everyone else is a colleague, acquaintance, classmate, etc.)

    And, I think, it's the way FB is set up. For a while -- yes, I'll admit -- I played Mafia Wars. Got a lot of "friends". Quit playing, removed the app, and now the "friends" are dropping off. Which is fine since that's all we had in common. Beats me taking the time to "defriend".

    (I would, however, be quite offended if any of my IRL friends dropped me as that would speak to a relationship problem.)

    For business purposes, what is working for now for me is a fan page. That may change; we'll see. Just experimenting.

    I also wonder -- with FB seemingly trying to become more Twitter-like, if they will remove or expand the 5000 friend limt?
  • I agree Chris. We're not doing it because we dislike the people (although some who constantly post links to their products or services, that's another story), we're doing it because, like you said, we just don't talk to the people anymore.

    Remember the days of Myspace and your "top friends"? It's similar to that. Just because you had someone in your top friends, doesn't mean anyone else wasn't good enough. The key difference though was that those were people we most likely engaged and connected with, a lot more than others.
  • I think it is key with facebook to use filters for your friends. You have to add friends, even if you haven't met them personally, and that is possible when you can sort everyone out.
  • Instead of disconnecting friends, I've started putting them in groups and limiting their access rights, so that they can't see my wall and such. The group is named "Low interaction", because I don't interact with those people very often.

    It's a bit less than defriending them, but still keeps them segregated off so that I don't see their stuff as much.
  • Kristin
    Your "low interaction" group seems like a way to segregate a group of friends into an "acquantance" outer circle. How is this working out for you?
  • I make pretty heavy use of filters on the social networks I use every day. There's no way I could keep up with the chatter from the hundreds of "friends" I've connected with on Facebook, Twitter, Livejournal, etc.

    What I really, really want and have never yet seen is a content filter that would let me screen out all the silly quizzes and weird Facebook games and just keep the actual content that my friends write.

    There are a lot of people who write smart, interesting stuff on topics I care about, but they clog up my view with a dozen "Mafia Wars" updates or "What Twilight Character Are You?" quizzes between each post, so I don't read them at all.
  • I think the true 'hurt' comes from which of the networks is your primary. For instance, I use Twitter more than Facebook in terms of frequency of updates and interaction with users. If someone deletes me from Facebook, depending on how close we are in 'real life' I may or may not really worry about it. On Twitter, however, if I value this person as a connection, whether personal or professional, I'd get a lil' pouty. :) I recently trimmed my Facebook friend list as well and usually do a Twitter sweep monthly. Basically, if I come across your avatar/pic and have to think about who you are/the last time we interacted, you probably get purged. I think thats fair.
  • Chris,

    That makes perfect sense, on both ends. There are times when we feel the need to simplify and sometimes de-friending is part of that process. On our end, it's not about hurting someone's feelings as much as it is about recognizing we have a finite amount of time and emotional energy. Most folks who've been in the social networking space for any time have likely already unfriended one or more people.

    And yet, when I've been on the receiving end of being unfriended, it takes me at least a moment to rationally work through the scenario.

    I'll be interested to see/hear what other thoughts you have about this in the days ahead.
  • Yawn! All you people on Paris time! Yes, it would be nice to qualify friend/follower lists with more granularity. It would not only save us time, but help them by not having to sift through irrelevant updates, feeds, etc. So don't feel bad when you scrub those lists. (Just don't axe me!)
    Thanks!
    s.c.
  • whitneyhoffman
    Architecture Dictates Function.

    This goes for anything from our neocortex (which is why Dunbar's number is tricky to boost too far beyond 150- that 's the limit of our Monkey Brain capacity) to our homes, to our desktops, to our social networks.
    It's why good design is so critical to the success of a website, a product, a phone, a pair of shoes, a presentation- you name it.

    When I design events or experiences for folks, it's important to not underestimate the importance of the space in the experience. Where can people gather? Where can people grab a bite, sit and talk and connect? Have we factored in time and place for them to do this as well as planned activities? It adds a whole additional dimension to event planning, but the space itself often is a critical part of the overall experience.

    And I think what we're seeing is that creating of virtual places for people to share and be and connect requires both the big gather areas as well as the smaller nooks or cafes to have more intimate experiences and connections. We need public and private space, and some space that's in between. The trick will be either to identify and smooth out the friction spots that exist and make this flow difficult in the virtual networks that exist, or create a new place where the flow between these levels of intimacy, so to speak, are less kluge-y and awkward.
  • Gr8 point, interesting thoughts, and I noticed the subtle jab at the programmers, sureeeee blame it all on the developers :-P, but yeah the platforms should use a forcing mechanism for grouping "friends" instead of do what you want where most of the users will never take advantage of the feature and instead drown in their friend's list and endless meaningless posts.....
  • You're perfectly right. What makes sense from a business or technical pov for these social networks is quite unhealthy behavior from a sociological/socio-psychological pov. I hope that the tecchies who create these networks will start taking social psychology into consideration. Right now, all major networks are pushing openness (no privacy) and cross-posting. Not being able to keep one's social contexts and audiences separate, like we do offline, is the cause of a lot of trouble (and job losses) in society.
  • I think the ratio that we personally have as friends as a result of our travels, conferences, expo's etc versus what our list may have should be considered. If I have 500 friends listed but someone I may not interact with very much has only 100 or 50, I remember the way humans just connect and associate. It is not necessarily based on words or post updates. Sometimes its just knowing that you have a friend, that you will always be connected and that even if time passes by without much interaction, you never know what the future will bring. They may be someone I need to turn to down the road.
  • Steve Woodruff hit the nail on the head in the earlier comments. When you rank everybody equally none of them have any value. They are not friends. They are connections with different classifications and value. They should all be classified as connections initially and then you can rank and rate them from there. This has been an idea of mine for awhile. It would then allow us to see the better connected people and therefore the ones that are more powerful and more influential.
  • A few months back, there was a rumor that Facebook was going to add the ability to separate friends from fans on regular pages. This would have been a good idea and fallen into the "Thank you for following me, however we don't know each other like that" category. As it stands, you either have to accept people or not accept them. No differentiation.

    A nosey person looking over my shoulder at my computer screen today exclaimed "YOU HAVE 1,765 FACEBOOK FRIENDS? :O". I was like "Yeah." They go "Have you really met them all?" and I'm like "No. Only about 900 of them".

    I would LOVE to have tiers of Facebook connection to indicate physical proximity on the one hand and amount of actual interaction on the other. I chat more with Phil Campbell in England than I do with lots of people that live here in NYC, so there should be a way to express these differences.
  • Chris
    Also a point to be considered is that we invite people to befriend us, then drop them. For example, I think we are friends on FB and I am likely to be one of the people you drop or have dropped because our lives do not intersect at all. Yet I would not have become FB friends without you extending that invitation. Mind you, I understand, but it is challenging when we court people to become FB friends and then cull the list of people we invited to follow us. :)
  • Chris,
    Thanks for including me in your post today, Chris! And your topic is a familiar issue.

    I'm experiencing something similar. My friends list is a bit of a burden. I try to keep it all separate into lists (High School Friends, Work, Family), but I end up having to sort and re-sort every other month. I created a fan page to make it easier to separate the professional and personal updates, but it appears people would rather have the profile connection. So, I'm just going with the flow and hope I don't get washed away!
  • It's arguments like this that are one of my primary reasons for being far more selective in my "friending" on Facebook than I am on Twitter (or anywhere else). On Twitter, people follow and unfollow ... it just happens. I don't think much of it, for the most part.

    I see lots of people with friend lists that are very, very close to the 5000 person Facebook-imposed limit. Some complain that this limitation makes things exclusionary, but I actually see the limit as a good thing. Since I view Facebook as a place where I have the opportunity to really get to know someone, see their face, know what's going on in their day-to-day life, I don't see how it'd be possible to do that with upwards of 5000 people. I get lots and lots of friend requests from people whom I've never met -- people that I've never even heard of -- that I simply don't confirm. I always send a message explaining why, but I don't feel like I need to friend everyone and his brother just because they see me on Twitter, or wherever. Facebook is for people whom I know personally. Period. I couldn't possibly, nor would I want to, keep up with things were I to have a friend list of more than a few hundred folks.

    So, for me, the choice to unfriend there would actually NOT be a matter of simple data management, as I do actually view my friends there as just that: FRIENDS. Not followers, but friends.
  • jasmineguevara
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It all depends on the end user, IMHO. I don't allow SNSs to dictate my friending and unfriending behaviors. I don't wait for it to tell me to double-check my privacy settings...I do my due diligence to make sure that "what I want still stands." The average user never knew that the default privacy settings have been horrible for a while; Facebook's rare warning was what brought it to the surface, hence the recent misguided uproar.

    In real life, is there really such a mechanism or algorithm that puts your friends in front of you so that you can interact with them more? I'd say take charge of your friendships/relationships. I'd take a more proactive role by seeking them out from amongst the large crowd. I don't rely on my newsfeed to tell me how my close friends are doing. I go straight to their wall. If we really want to have our own smaller community, we can form a Group, just like in real life. If I don't really know a person, anyway, OR if I don't want him/her in my semi-inner circle, I won't accept the friend request. If you're kinda on the fence, there used to be a way to still add that friend but at the same time, customize what that friend can see on your page (I've never had to use this option so I'm not sure if it's still there). Or, take an even more proactive approach: if you know that your "unfriendable" person is on Facebook but you don't want him/her on there, stay ahead of the game by blocking him/her before he/she decides to add you (read: stalker). It's much less painful to do preventive maintenance that way rather than accept the request and unfriend later (damage control).

    Again, it all depends on the end user and what the objective is for being on Facebook. Different SNSs may serve different purposes for the same user. For me, Facebook has worked very well (so far)...and because I've carefully set up my privacy settings to where I want it to be, I don't get very many "weird" friend requests to worry about...at least, for now.

    Now that you got me started, I'm thinking: what a long comment! I should've blogged about this, instead. (Happy Holidays, Chris! Your blog has helped with my Social Media research since January 2009.)
  • I responded to your post on Facebook but in re-reading this had some additional thoughts. The social nature of social media and social networking creates the emotional overlay to what could be simple data management. Not sure if any sorting mechanisms change the impact on someone who wants to be (or be perceived as being) your friend in one of the social networks. I imagine it's intensified for you because of the social media "rockstar" status you enjoy but it would hold true for all of us.

    I don't care if my name is removed from an email database (actually might celebrate that fact) and am accustomed to losing Twitter followers but being unfriended carries a bit of a stigma even while I respect your right to manage your friends list in anyway that works for you,

    Thanks. Envy you Paris. ;)
  • michaelholloway
    Some of my friends are utterly devastated when they're unfriended. For some it's a hateful game defreinding one day, refrieneding after a brief period of fuming . Over what? - that someone was drunk and embarrassed another with some rant or other. Or said something in the 'public' space that should have been said in private? Sounds very familiar, like life.

    I haven't unfriended anyone on facebook as I know them in the real world - there there because of that; on Twitter on the other hand I unfollowed several, people who are always negative for example, some who turn out to be Mechanical Turks for advertisers.

    I expect that sooner or later I will be unfriended by someone, and I suppose it won't be that different as being dismissed from a blog comment area - which has happened - people mistaking ignorance or naiveté as a phishing expedition. I let that drip off my back, as usual in social circumstances it you who knows you best, and not everyone is going to like you.

    The essential thing I believe, about these push-button-brutalities are misscommunication, a result of our skill levels in broadcasting and listening to written and spoken language. Vocabulary, grammar, punctuation; have come a long way in the 10 years, I remember when chat room English seemed to be everywhere, but it was - it turned out - to be not exact enough for social networking online. Those who used it either clarified their meaning (which meant More typing rather than Less), or ended up misunderstood and friendless.

    Twitters brevity is also demanding succinctness, and is pushing our skills forward in a new way.

    New interfaces are coming, and needed, but I think (with a lot of relief) that good old English is the answer to the greater part of the problem that you have pointed to. 10cc said in a song way before social networking online: "Communication is the problem to be answered". Still so I think.

    Michael Holloway
  • Nature already (and like always) has already invented the answer and we call it death. To be more precise: apopthosis. Cells in a healthy body die, if they do not receive enough signals telling them that their live is worth living... They die of loneliness you could say. This APOPTOSIS function would be usefull in managing contacts. So you would NEED to actively maintain contacts in order to keep the connection alive. Passive lurking will be short lived...
  • This is a really excellent post. Not necessarily 'inspiring' like the other posts I've read on your blog (thank you!), but a lot more reflective. I really dug nrek's comments below as it expands bit. "Our friend behavior matches what software developers have designed. It’s not exactly written by sociologists.". Dig it.
  • Question for you Chris: Would you still make this trim now if you weren't limited to 5000 friends on facebook?

    Although I'm guilty for trying to manage my social media accounts on occasion (most likely procrastination) it almost seems like a waste of time, especially to get rid of people from our social media lists unless we are limited by what the software/databases limit us to.

    Sarge | BeginnerBlogger.com
  • Adi
    Hmm, I think I need to follow your way Chris.
    I have some friends who have added me and I don't even know them!
    That's not what a social media is made for IMHO.
    Having ton of friends list is only make benefit if you run business by using the power of social media.
  • fabulousphotogifts
    Hi Chris

    I'm reminded of the old phrase - "they also serve who only stand and wait".

    I think if your social connections are that - purely social, then there's not so much of an issue but de-friending is still not nice. (perhaps a 'back burner' friends list?)

    If you're connecting via a business perspective, then unless the person you're friending does something outright offensive or illegal, then they're a friend for life. De-friending them probably reflects more on your business than it does you - good reputations and all that jazz.

    Luckily, I've never had cause to un-friend anyone (yet) and hopefully, long may that continue.

    Let me put it another way. I might say hi to everyone I pass in the street (being happy and welcoming sort that I am) but I don't expect any further interaction from that person - nice if you get it but I don't expect it. That's not why I said hi to them in the first place.

    Sorry - I've not been back much this month - December just doesn't leave us much time for anything apart from work.

    Jonathan.
  • Well, I have a question to you: have you accept all the friendship proposals? If yes, why? Why you'll add somebody on your list (FB, Linkedin, twitter...)?
  • I do wish these systems would allow us to put people into various concentric circles of intimacy (business contacts, acquaintances, friends) with different levels of disclosure for each. I really don't like, on Facebook for instance, having people in my professional network intermingled as "equals" with high school buddies, family members, etc. I also see a distinction between people we're connected with in a relationship, vs. people who are more of an info-stream - but that's for a blog post going up this morning. Bottom line: it's awkward.
  • As part of a larger series a while back, describing the ideal web interface, here's a fuller description of the kind of classification that would be helpful to have: http://bit.ly/4NVBBn
  • I think there's another interesting dynamic that I'm surprised isn't discussed very frequently (or maybe I've missed it) about "trimming" social networks. And that's if these people are your friends - your real life friends, I mean - then you're probably interacting with them outside of Facebook on a regular basis. And if that's happening with any frequency, then you really may not need to know what they're doing today, or reading today, or taking pictures of today. And therefore, the value of having them cluttering up your news feed with redundant information - information you already or will soon know from your IRL interactions with them - seems to be far less than keeping distant tabs on friends who you haven't seen in a while and to which you're only close enough to see the semi-public portions of their life. That line of thinking, of course, would necessitate the opposite response - the closer you are, the less I need to be your facebook friend.

    Of course, this all depends on how you use social media tools like Facebook, and how your friends do too. Now, you may not be getting much value from those more distant relationships, and therefore, the underlying point remains that you shouldn't cloud your new stream with unnecessary information. But I find it interesting that most people's initial reaction to social media overload is to ax those for which you don't interact a great deal. It's mine too.
  • Hi Chris!

    Thanks for a great read here!

    You really got me thinking hard and smart. As a new follower of social media, I sometimes find the lack of 'personal touch' in mediums such as Facebook a tad too ironic to fathom.

    Yet, my main reason for riding the social media wave is to be a Significance to people. If, by God's grace, I'm able to be a Significance to everyone, I will work at it.

    Cheers!
  • A few thoughts; the function of including "friends" on social networks is, from a developer point of view, a smart business move to gain the trust of your users, and turn them into cross-engaging interaction evangelists for your software. So the notion from that stand point is to retain traffic by leveraging the human need to feel like they're a part of something -

    Which brings me to the sociology aspect - we love our clans. All primates are group-loving social creatures that rely on one another, and the interactions in between, active or passive, to get a much needed feeling of inclusion into an interest (whether a genuine interest or not); in short - we don't want to feel "left out", even if it's not something we're interested in directly.

    Proactively disengaging from passive and disinterested lurkers is awesome, and should be done to social networks as a norm; otherwise - there could come a time where we're all simply passive listeners amongst a select few talkers, and that's not a healthy way to grow, as a person, as a species.
  • Chris, You make a very good point. I have a real-life example of where my mother-in-law was not pleased with some of the postings that my sister was making, so she "defriended" her by removing her from her friend list. She could have simply ignored her, but she completely took her off. The fallout was that my sister came after me asking how could my mother-in-law do such a thing? I was honest with my sister in that I said there are some postings she has done that could be considered offensive or crude. I was being honest. For being honest, I was ripped into and called insensitive and uncaring. As a result, my sister blocked me from Facebook and blocked any e-mail correspondence from me. Oh and she refuses to talk to me. This happened 2 months ago. Such a sad situation.

    It baffled me since I was attacked for the actions of someone else defriending her on Facebook. How could that be? Just because it was my mother-in-law who did it. Crazy. So, yes, I can see where people who are defriended can feel emotions even though the person who blocks or removes them doesn't think it is a big deal.
  • nolafilm
    Mark,

    Was reading through the comments and sorry to hear about the fallout with your sister. You might want to check out Crucial Conversations - it's helped me communicate effectively in difficult emotionally-charged situations - http://vitalsmarts.com/crucialconversations_boo...

    I don't work for the authors or publishers - I'm just a believer in their method and have recommended their book to about a dozen people.
  • Thank you nolafilm for the book recommendation. I should check it out.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: