Shared publicly  - 
It's hard to reconcile G+ Circles w/ a philosophy of sharing everything w/ everyone & letting others decide if it's relevant to them or not.
John Langley's profile photoA.J. Hyman's profile photoLorraine Orenchuk's profile photoDavid Roy's profile photo
I reconcile it easily - I just share everything publicly.
There really is no such thing as privacy in the cloud. All you are really doing is limiting the audience initially to whom you want to make sure sees your post.
I don't know if I see the circles as useful for sharing as opposed to more specific collaborating. If I know that there is something I want to discuss relevant to the AB Social Studies Curriculum, it can be more much easier to direct the conversation/create a hangout (although I have yet to do that). I think I can still share as widely as I want just to more than one circle (or all).
(Half the insight I get from the web is from following the right people - but the other half is serendipity that I get from following the wrong people. And of course there is really no way to tell the two groups apart.)
I see circles as a way I can mix audiences on one platform. I have pretty much kept FB to non-education friends & kept Twitter as education related. I can have different circles on here and post to separate circles so my friends don't have to wade through things they don't care to see.
Good point. I think it's a different philosophy....more about organising your information & sharing with those you think should have access to it. I'd really like one place where I could be sharing with all my contacts - but I don't want my colleagues seeing photos posted by friends for eg. Maybe G+ will morph more into a space to work with others on different projects? Altho I haven't quite worked out the public/private sharing yet.
I do the circles thing partly so I can filter my stream in to sub sections and partly so I can send appropriate stuff to appropriate circles. The latter is rare and 99% of the stuff I post is public.
I have family that don't want stuff public, and I don't want all my family stuff out there. FB's EULA/Privacy stuff is opaque in the extreme, and has a habit of changing things mid-stream and resetting to "public" that makes it hard for me to trust. We'll see if Google does better.
I appreciate the ease of "circles" in sharing resources across disciplines. I try to do that with Diigo, but I like that fact that I can do that within the same domain as my email, images, calendar, etc. Different audience too, I suppose...
I'd like to share circles more openly if possible, much like we can easily share Twitter lists.
I too kind of separate me FB and Twitter between education and non-education. That is part of the reason I used hootsuite and tweetdeck. so I can choose to share with one or the other or both.
I'm conflicted about rebuilding my PLN.
How are you "rebuilding" anything? Fiddling, perhaps, but "rebuilding" gives too much agency to the other tools in your toolbox.
I understand the idea of "narrowcasting" - BUT assuming that the off-topic stuff is "clutter" or "noise" isn't necessarily a good assumption. I dig interesting noise in my signals. I'm sure that others don't - but it's a big world.
The noise is definitely what has pushed my thinking since discovering Twitter (I am a better educator due to all of you). If this is a true meshing of the personal and the professional, the randomness in posting will always be there (on some level at least...). I hope to truly connect with people the way I did when my digital PLN was first growing. Not that I have become overwhelmed by the connectivity or the constant and diverse stream....I just lost that personal dialogue I had enjoyed. I don't see this as a place to rebuild my PLN but as an opportunity to structure my system in a way I can maintain more meaningful conversation and strengthen relationships. I will say...this makes so much more sense to me than Wave did... 
Agree with Stephen, easily to share everything publicly. The possibility to customize the posts is something good though!
I guess that might be why we stick with both - I can see the point of circles for example for students. In facebook they have the identity crisis when a professor joins, but circles will allow them to post some things in 'semi-professional' mode and 'look, here's someone drunk on youtube' posts to their mates. Similarly for research projects, conferences etc it means you can avoid that spamming followers. So if you want to do the broadcast to everyone approach (which is still my preferred method), then maybe better sticking with twitter. For more selective distribution, Google + ?
I agree Alec. I would really like the ability to tag my posts with different subjects and then give others the option to block/hide posts with tags they weren't interested in. I like to post on issues relating to libraries, edtech, education, politics, environment, movies, music, books, etc... I have a lot of interests. Some of those match up with others in my library/education circle and some don't. I'd like to share everything and let others decide how much to follow.
I agree w/ what +Kelly Hines said. On the other side - I figure if someone adds me to their circles, they would like to hear what I have to say. They can then choose to use their circles to filter me later :).
+Alec Couros "a philosophy of sharing everything" - Alec, I question whether or not any of us, including you, actually adhere to this philosophy, or if it is merely an unachievable hypothetical philosophy?

In fact, I would posit that you do not share everything - you only share a subset of what you have to share. You may choose to share what you share with everyone in your network, but you don't share everything in your life. And since you don't share everything, you are already filtering, and if that's the case, why make a distinction between your filtering and the filtering facilitated by the circles feature?

Perhaps your query needs to be restated as: "It's hard to reconcile G+ Circles w/ a philosophy of open access & letting others decide if it's relevant to them or not"

Thus restated, and even as an advocate of open access, I nonetheless think that there remains bits of information which are not best shared in a fully open context, as many others have here commented.

(sorry, you caught me in a metaphysical moment :D )
You've talked about vulnerable populations before, Alec, people for whom open sharing doesn't feel possible or safe. Perhaps circles give them the ability to share on a platform but without sharing everything to everyone. (I'm not sure whether your original post was related to you specifically or just in general.)
+Meredith Stewart I still believe that's true - so I'd agree with you there. This post was more about my own philosophy on the matter. But, I'd also agree with +A.J. Hyman above re: limitations of 'sharing everything' and the likelihood of a pre-filtered reality.
I'm kind of liking that feature. I have boundaries in my offline life that I would like to maintain in my online life. There are people that I connect with online, follow, friend, etc that I don't want mixing with, for example, my family.
I interact with some folks that are on the fringe of community and I support them, stay connected with them because inclusion works to bridge people into non-criminal choices. However, I also know that they are prone to relapse and slipping down that slope into re-offending, sometimes violently.
I also have folks that I connect with to talk about stuff that is so not interesting to the rest of my network. I mean seriously, do you really want to listen to a few of us on Twitter waxing poetic about the safest place to inject heroin.. Really.. do you?
I like that circles compartmentalize who I am sharing with, but love that I can stream whatever circles I want at the moment - that's where it makes the difference. Sharing then becomes less cluttered.
Sounds like teaching, Alec. We share everything with all of our students but don't know which of them find it relevant. :-) This made me smile. Google + does seem to adapt well to education.
I know this is late, but Alec just added me. What I find nice about the Circles is that I can combine everybody into one place, but decide what's appropriate for which audience.

For example, I have professional associations here (MET program students/graduates, though Alec is my first non-student contact here) and I have family and friends. If I share something relatively personal that I don't want to put right in the face of my professional associations, I don't have to include them. If they stumble upon it in some other way, I don't mind. I'm not actively hiding it. But I'm not presenting it to them on a platter.

On the other hand, if I have something Ed Tech related to post, none of my friends care about that in the slightest. So I don't include them.
Add a comment...