Shared publicly  - 
Google+ Tips: Let the Right One In
Say you send out invitations to a party and tell your friends to bring their "plus ones". But then, without asking you, those friend-of-a-friends invite someone else. And those people invite all the people they know.

Would you let them all into house? Some of you would. Some of you wouldn't. The important thing to remember is that it's your choice.

The Downside to Letting Everyone In
1. Stream It clogs your stream with stuff from people you don't know and probably don't care about. When people share with Extended Circles, they are sharing with everyone they follow and everyone those people follow. If you look at a post and wonder, why am I seeing stuff from this guy? I didn't follow him? Yeah. But someone you do follow did.

2. Profile It makes it appear to others looking at your profile that you know someone in common. Many people make the choice to include someone based on the idea that they are friends of a trusted friend. "Hey, M follows him. He must be okay." There's no way for them to know why you followed someone: close friend or just a guy you ran into at some other guy's party.

3. Relevance It messes up the Find and Invite Suggestions
Google+ suggests (not recommends, important distinction) people based on your contacts and interactions. When you invite people in, Google+ suggests more people based on who they know. So if you invite a spammer into your social circle, you are telling Google+ to suggest this guy to all your friends.

Social networking relies on "trust by association". When you let just anyone in, you're giving your real friends bad recommendations.

Remember. The vampires can't get into your house unless you invite them. When you invite them in you are assuming some responsibility for their actions. Luckily, in Google+, it's just as easy to uninvite them.

Update: 2011-07-24. Added link to bot attack: A certain shade of Scoble.
Do not follow people just because they follow you. Follow them because you want to read what they have to say or you want to share something with them.
Jim Dumser's profile photolaura baskeyfield's profile photoLawrence del Mundo's profile photoG. Leigh Anderson's profile photo
what would help is if we could show people other people in the same circle we put them.
+Colin Lovett If there are 21 or less people in that circle, then your readers can click the Limited link and see who else is in the group. So if I share something with MyFamily circle, they can infer that it wasn't shared with HisFamily circle. You can rollover the tiles and add people from that circle on the fly.
But you can share with more than one circle at the same time, like »family« »friends« »neighbors« so you can never know.
That's the beauty of Google+. You don't know how I classified you. If you don't recognize the other people, you can always introduce yourself or host a cocktail party -- as we've discussed in previous posts.

If the author thinks providing context is important, he can always begin with a salutation.
The don't follow back is a great suggestion. In Google+, the Incoming feature is actually cool because you can occasionally dip into the realm of the one-way followers very easily and engage with those in-a-blue-moon folks without having them in a regular circle or your stream.
People need to post at least a few public posts so that I can get an idea who they are before adding them.
+Shareef Jackson You certainly should not add them if they don't write anything of interest to you. The point is maybe they don't care if you add them. Not everyone is here to be noticed by strangers. Many people are here just to communicate privately with the people whom they already know.
+Shareef Jackson I'm glad you get it...that's what this post was about. I add a lot of people to my circles (like the writers at Mashable) because I want to read their stuff -- not because I'm expecting them to follow me back. If someone doesn't post any public posts, maybe they are just a reader.

The people I'm addressing are the ones who complain that someone isn't posting publicly -- like the lack of public posts is a defect. It's as if they think we all owe them a public presence so that they can give us a thumbs up or a thumbs down.
I have a notice on my profile asking for people not to follow me if they don't know me because I only post to My Circles, and someone started following me. I politely asked them in a comment on their posts to stop following me thanks, because I won't make public posts and it's of no interest to you. People started harassing me on that comments section saying I had no business being on G+, one called me an idiot, and another girl copied what was on my profile and posted it on her own Posts section talking trash about me and how she was looking out for people with too much of a high regard about themselves. That is the ugly side of oversocial people trading public circles back and forth. I was at that point getting 10+ people a day I did not know from ANYWHERE adding me to circles and Following me. I left Facebook because of privacy issues. There should be an option to avoid people from following you, or at least a way to have to accept each of those requests. Those people, even if I block them still follow my (non-existing) public posts, I show up in their Circles and they can share circles with me in them to all their friends. I don't understand how this is a good thing.
Jose, sounds like you are looking for a feature similar to the Allow Subscribers on Facebook, but in reverse. There, you can opt for a one way relationship with people you don't know.

Google may eventually get around to that feature. In the meantime, I would suggest that you hide your public posts (you have around five) and not join public threads. You can also remove yourself from showing in Circles.

Also, your intro probably spurs people on. I would suggest that you change it to something like, "I am a private person who never posts public messages." or something innocuous, then just block people who follow you. Without public posts comments and engagement, I bet things will trickle off. If not, change your profile photo because maybe you have a following that finds you handsome or noteworthy for having a good photo. 
it is becoming quite apparent that your advice on the use of this tool is right on the nose. effectively, you are trying to avert a "tragedy of the commons" for g+. i suspect that, at this particular moment in internet culture, your advice will mostly not be heeded, that the tool will degenerate to what you fear but, hopefully, eventually, solutions that will allow the selectivity you discuss will emerge. in the meantime, A.D.D. will win the day. [i did very much enjoy the film version of Let the Right One In, btw]
is there one, +M Sinclair Stevens , i had no idea. btw, if you are into films, there is one recent case in which both the original & the american remake work well (AND, unusually, they were directed by the same director, a Georgian). the film is "13 tzameti" & though the subject matter is dreadful & disturbing, both versions show strong film-making skills (as well as values you appreciate yourself: mastery & precision). if you have to choose, of course, watch the original.
Add a comment...