Shared publicly  - 
Is anyone else "share-flinchy?" Seeing that FB joke a million times today made me less interested in sharing.
Tony Hastings's profile photoAaron Manley Smith's profile photoKaren Masullo's profile photoSusan Cooper's profile photo
Absolutely. Stuff just gets repeated over and over.
I understand where you are coming from, but I am not since I feel like I am a bridge between the English/American Internet and the Arab Internet.
think that's common. but wasnt it like that on Twitter as well? If you saw that same link over and over, would you RT it as well? Maybe - maybe there is difference in our use here
definitely. share original thoughts. share your own content. but for stuff someone else is likely to post ... find it and comment on it there, I guess. Or just ... don't.
Depends on what it is. With such a small user base right now, everything goes viral far more quickly than it will once the flood gates open.
For whatever reason, a retweet was easier to ignore, right?
Yes...long ago I decided to not even bother sharing things you know you will see hundreds of anything from mashable...
I missed the joke, could someone share it again?
I think that is less bothersome on Twitter because you usually only see the link and not the entire object in line. On G+ the joke consumed a great deal of my window each time it was reposted
Couldn't expect more if G+ use share function as is reblog on Tumblr. I think they should use Koprol's bump function. Less repeated posting
when I RT your link to X news story, it just becomes a subtle info that "RT by X". On G+ it becomes it's own thread. Yes, this difference is important, and G+ needs to fix this
I'm sorry, I don't understand all your big fancy social media words, sir.
I wish when we use plus one for a post it would ask if we wanted to share it like google does on google reader. Easy cheesy UI.
We're a week in -- this is the incestuous stage. And I mean that nicely.
+Chris Brogan I think it's the sheer presence a post takes in your stream. I agree that it's a bit weird to share, moreso for the fact that I'd like the comments and conversation to become centralised within the original post.
I have now been challenged to only share original stuff from me on here. This will require me to think more and post less most likely. I like it
I think on top of testing it for Google, we are also learning etiquette for using Google+. Remember when you 1st started using any of the other social media community tools. It was a bit of a learning curve and we had to learn what was and was not proper on each of them. That is what we are doing here.
It is a bit share flinchy. It really needs to get to the stage where if someone you have in a circle shares something it should be aggregated with all the other same shares by URL w/ the comments aggregated as well. It's getting to the point when people share things it takes up my stream and the comments should be converged.
+Chris Brogan Totally agree with +Joel Mackey on this one. Saw several shares duplicated shares today, each with their own set of comments. To have those aggregated in some way would be awesome.

I have started watching the number of shares at the bottom of each post, and if I see a few of my friends have already shared a post, I simply comment instead of sharing. Maybe if Google made this more prominent, people would think twice before sharing again in their circles?

I have also noticed many people doing "via type" reshares to credit several users for the share, and that has the possibility of being really spammy. Not only are they creating a new post, it's also basically hijacking the original share. I personally like that the original poster now gets the credit for the share, and feel that commenting on most shares may be the best option on Google+.

Maybe instead of sharing, google+ could allow comments to also show as a post in your feed, with a link and title of the post? This would allow a link to the post, and your comments visible to your circles, but not a full reshare. ;-)

cc: +Jonathan Lally +Dave Besbris
i had flashbacks to tumblr, and realized after i shared it it really wasn't what i wanted to do with the service. Tumblr is tumblr and good at what it does. this is differernt
great word...flinchy until i figure all this out i guess ;)
What I find of certain importance I share. The rest I keep it for me.
Good question +Chris Brogan. If a post is worth sharing (driven by content of course), share it. Right now we have tech reporters, super users with a pretty strong social graph, and otherwise folks who understand and get social media so sharing a post from Mashable like other users suggested not doing probably does provide little value. But as G+ grows and more folks use it, sharing a post from Mashable may actually turn "newer" users on to a great site/blogger and provide high value. On Twitter, I share some of Mashable's, Social Media Examiner and others as not everyone has heard of some of these sites. I actually like sharing some of the excellent posts I come across. I figure that if a bit of particular information provided value to me, it may be able to do the same for someone else.
A filter function to filter over shared post will be charming, really hope google+ will have it soon.
Maybe it's because there's not that many of us here. It's kinda like being at a barbeque and everyone's telling the same joke to the same 20 people. :0)
I seem to only share things I think are worthy of +Christopher Penn's #thefive (at least for gamers and people in my niche community)
My question is, and I'm guilty of this, if you pretty much have similar engaged user graphs from network to network, what's the deal with all the cross posting? It's a little different, but along the principal yeah?
I already found that a tad annoying with Twitter, but one RT is only a line or two. Now screen-filling pictures can get shared over and over.

I guess circles will help, eventually. I have my feet in a particular part of online life, and could find stuff there to share with friends and family. Not many of those are on G+ yet, though. :)

Still, I hope this doesn't become an echo chamber.
I feel that a new Google+ etiquette will evolve over time as we are used to applying the conventions we have in other places. For instance I have been applying Twitter etiquette by adding a 'via' acknowledging where I saw the link but after reading the comment from +Susan Cooper I can see that isn't necessary.

I like her idea of being a bit more discerning and looking at a post to see who has shared before adding to the stream again and just commenting. Sounds like a good thought to be able to add a comment to your own stream, that would be a lot tidier than seeing the whole post repeatedly and would still enable anyone who hadn't seen the post to pay a visit by way of the link.
The jury is still out. There isn't a big enough user base and I'm not seeing too much repeated sharing outside of Google+ tips. I'm sure they will die off in time though.
Add a comment...