Shared publicly  - 
Google+ needs to come up with a way for people to split up incoming and outgoing feeds, for those who feel the need to share everything publicly. It would be nice to be able to share with others and still be able to have some control over their incoming feed.

I fear the only other solution will be to start uncircling people as election time grows closer.
Christopher Helton's profile photoKrista Cagg's profile photoMark Cunningham (thedeadone)'s profile photoDarva Shriver's profile photo
Of course the other option is that people stop acting like attention whores and share their posting responsibly.
I wish people would just post their political ranting to Political feeds. One of the reasons I'm not digging Facebook us because some people feel a need to insult everyone in a given party publicly. I put that in the same category as other hate talk.
when someone sends out a dozen posts in 10 minutes - the circle is broken ;)
+Michael Garcia This has to do more with political and social outrage posting, more than anything. Its the internet so I expect a degree of TMI.

+Wayne Humfleet Not just that, but if I really want political commentary....gamers tend to be low on the list of people that I go to for that.
I'v been playing with the sliders on my circles, i got it to a manageable level. I just readjust what circle people are in.
Unfortunately, the incentive is to go more and more public the more followers people have.

This is not going to change because that's the way G+ is stuctured.
well, that and overly political (negative) post tend to lead to me breaking the circle.

Doesn't matter if I share the political views - I'm here for your gaming thoughts, not which politician is an asshole - they all are ;)
One proposed option I saw is that instead of just sticking a person in a circle you stick their "channels" in your circle (with an option for All channels). Then no matter where they post (public or in a circle that has you in it) if they tag it to the right channel you get it into your stream. But it still relies on people self filtering but may be an easier way to so.

Something like this:
It's a good way to get fewer followers. Seriously, we don't have to follow anyone. It's not the shortcomings of Google, it's the shortcomings of people posting.
The problem is one of misaligned incentives, you desire control over what you see, but posters have more than just you to worry about.
Yes, but I don't care about their priorities. My incoming stream is mine to fill with what I want.
Most of us follow a person for one central topic (or group of related topics). However, they may not have you grouped the same way and may be posting on 10 other topics you don't care about. Without the ability to tag by topic and follow by topic the only choice now is when the noise to signal ratio gets too high you have to uncircle them or move them to a muted circle that doesn't show in your stream.
+A. Miles Davis The problem is that won't work for how I post on here. I have my circles based on who I want to target content to, and who wants to see that content. Splitting circles means that flow will be broken.
Keep your big circles. Just create a new one with your favorite posters. Then when you mute the big group your favorites will still shine through. :)
example: I have two RPG circles.
RPG and RPG Following.
RPG is turned up high, and it is mostly the people I interact with frequently.
RPG Following is turned low (but not off), and is used more for my outgoing.

Whenever I post to one, I post to both circles. As they sit next to each other, it's not a chore for me to just click one more circle to add to.
What I've done is I've created various "POST" circles and 4 "READ" circles (Always, Sometimes, Never, and Still Deciding). This way I don't try to categorize people, per se, and account for those who do everything "public". Might I recommend just creating an "I'll read them later" circle and setting that to "Never Show"? This way, when the election is over, you can see if it's safe for you to bring them back, without necessarily uncircling them.

Hope that made sense.
The problem is...that doesn't work for why I'm here on social media. I'm a blogger and a designer, I'm here to share content in a focused manner. If I wanted, I could just as easily share everything I do to my public stream, and then all of you would be bitching about the number of Youtube videos and weird music sites that I'm sharing.

I just think putting all of the responsibility on the person who's on the receiving end is a cop out.
Well I have asked people to self-filter before but it doesn't usually end well heh. Just some people are more stream-of-consciousness and don't care why people are following them. If the majority of their stuff is on a topic you care about that works but otherwise those kind of people you have to uncircle.
I don't know. I'm trying to strike a fair balance between posting about all the stuff I care about and not giving anyone too much of the kind of content they don't want. For me it's a big hassle to deal with targeting because I don't think of broadcasting that way so it requires a shift in paradigm for me, but I'm trying to start working on it.

(Then again, I think most of my early followers circled me for social justice/political stuff, so I worry they're gonna hate all the nerdy geek posts.)
Yep, pretty much. I'm not in this to have a ridiculous amount of followers or to just blast whatever I want to say to the world. If I want to do that, I've always got Twitter.
Well with me I have 2 large circles that probably follow me for very different reasons. One is for my hobbies (RPGs) and the other is for my career (SQL DBA). Since my professional circle has a lot of potential future employers I make sure to self-filter a lot.
My problem is that some of the political and social commentary I don't want to see is shared by people whose RPG post I care very much about.
In this case, Mute is your friend.
If I spend more time muting a person's posts than I do reading them, that also leads to uncircling for me. I've dropped some high volume and popular posters because I got tired of muting their posts.

Again, it shouldn't be the onus of the person who is on the incoming end of the stream to edit for for people. That's like saying its our responsibility to leave a room because someone is loud and rude in real life.
I completely agree about responsible posting. Muting is a band-aid to cover people posting stuff willy-nilly.
I'm still getting used to all of this so my Circles tend to be very basic. Friends, Aquaintences and Following. When I post an update I don't click Following because does The Walking Dead Circle really care that I'm going to be writing steampunk pulp fiction? Is Wil Wheaton really going to read my update? I don't think so.
+Wayne Humfleet: But who's to say that the resources have a "right" way to be used? (Note, this is totally a meta question about the tools of G+, not a specific question about this issue.) I think some of the difference in how people use G+ comes from what social tools they used pre G+. Different networks worked differently, and I think someone who came here from (for example) Twitter is probably more likely to be making reading circles and filtering on the reading side (and expecting others to do so) than someone who came from (for example) Livejournal.

Since the circle itself is not set up to enforce one kind of use over another it feels a little awkward to say "people need to use the resources the right way" to me... (Seriously! Not trying to pick a fight, just introducing a theory as to why people may expect one sort of behavior over another...)
+Rowan Cota Oh, I'm totally saying that people are doing this in a way that annoys them. I'm not really telling people to change how they post, just putting out a warning that people shouldn't be surprised if their postings cause me to drop them.

And on an unrelated note, this caused me to notice +David Przybyla for the first time. Welcome, David, to my gaming circle.
+Rowan Cota A lot of users have come here from Facebook. Facebook encourages shouting at people with their posting. Google+ is set up in a way that you can have private rooms where only the things you're interested in are said. Public posting here should be reserved for something that everyone might be interested in. It's just a paradigm shift that users need to wrap their head around.
+Christopher Helton: Oh, I know. It just introduced an interesting meta aspect to me that has now caused me to post a totally unscientific poll on my own stream. ;) (Also, FWIW, I'm trying to get better about thinking about whether people are actually interested in what I'm saying, but it IS a major shift for me. :) )

+Wayne Humfleet: What I'm saying though is nothing about G+ except user behavior defines the paradigm here (there's no written guidance for G+ to say whether Post or Read via circle is the privileged behavior). Therefore whatever the majority of people end up doing will be the paradigm. With that given, I understand that your preference is one thing, but I don't think it's fair to call that the "right" behavior. (And one might argue that G+ intentionally muddies their very own water by telling people to circle others by how they know them, which could privilege either Post or Read behavior depending on how people interpret it.)
Thank you +Christopher Helton. I'm still fairly new to Google+ and I'm still sorting out how to use circles, so this conversation is interesting to me.
Yeah. At least in my case +David Przybyla this is all musing on design principles from the perspective of a half-finished psych degree. (Because use cases fascinate me. I'm weird. I know.)
+Rowan Cota True, Google doesn't give good guidance on this at all. It's just through trial and error that most discover these things. I hardly read my Facebook stream anymore because I don't want to be yelled at or stuck in with people I also don't agree with. Politics muddies these waters and both Democrats and Republicans post some pretty hate filled tripe and lump everyone into the same bucket.

Filtering your circles gives you some control over this, and I've gotten mine down to what I like to see. Occasionally one slips through, and if it continues I will usually just un-circle them .

Not disagreeing with your take on things either. It is a culture thing. If this was twitter, I'd have had to stop typing by now. :)
Okay maybe I'm taking this all a little to much to heart...I don't know...but if I post something/an update/what have you and someone doesn't want to read it I would prefer that they contact me and ask to be moved to a different Circle instead of just dropping me.
PS - Dear Google. Please write clearer instructions!

(Now for a political message!) Sauron/E.L. Fudge Guy 2012!! WOOO!
+Krista Cagg Keep in mind that this is about heavy posting, too. I don't think that I've ever muted one of your posts...let alone having done it a couple of times in one day, just for one person.
Ah! None of y'all in my Circles do that so I'm convinced that everyone on G+ are intelligent and polite posters.
I think if Google add a few more features to Saved Search, it might be the answer for filtering by topics (putting a slider on a saved search and allowing searches within particular circles and so on). I think Google might be heading that way - because you can post to a "saved search", it's just missing all the other tools.

For the record I don't agree with the idea of expecting others to filter the posts according to personal preferences. But in general I'm okay in shifting people out of my regular reading circles if I get fed up with their output or don't find it interesting enough. Everyone gets a chance and then I start to dump them to lesser circles.
Sorry to chime in late, but since I was mentioned... First off, I ended up just taking a couple weeks off, and dusted off the blog ( tonight in fact. The main thing i wanted to clarify here is that G+ posts, and comments on the blog, were NOT the factors that led to me getting fed up and having a fit. Facebook on the other hand, I have decided is the Mos Eisley of the internet, and eliminated all contacts there that I don't personally know offline. I've never seen anything really offensive here, and the wildly offtopic stuff in gaming 'circles' is uncommon enough that I just ignore it if it doesn't interest me.