Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Elaine Nelson
292 followers
292 followers
About
Elaine's posts

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Home

Post has shared content
Lovely, mesmerizing.
Time laps view from space

Post has shared content
I've run into this before - it seems like an "allow this to be shared more widely" tickbox would be good enough.
Why Sharing To Circles On Google+ Is Broken
permalink: https://plus.google.com/u/0/108740570618849247850/posts/hV51KhTKTKD

Google has conflated a desire for privacy with the idea of sharing information selectively. That use case is, IMO, flawed, as this example (the screen captures) from +Carrie Brown illustrates.

Carrie elected to share public information -- a link to a Forbes article -- with her extended circles. Why she has limited the share of publicly-available information has to do with how she has chosen to use Google+. But if I want to share this public information publicly, I have to repost the link; I cannot share her post publicly.

There is real cognitive friction here -- copying, pasting, writing a headline etc is more laborious that clicking "share" and selecting "public." But "public" is not an option because of the original share.

This lock-down of content shared to circles came about after G+ launched -- when someone posted a note to a circle or circles, not a link to publicly available information, and that note was reshared publicly. This was an engineering response that was probably programmatically relatively easy.

But the nuanced response would be different. It would allow me and Carrie to share information within a circle but also allow that info to be reshared publicly if we said OK. This could apply to publicly accessible information like the Forbes article or a YouTube clip or it could apply to photos hosted here (like these screen captures) or even a note. (What do you call these things? They aren't blog posts. They aren't status updates. Ugh.)

As a result of the broken nature of sharing, I almost always share links publicly because I want the content to be reshared. Unfortunately, this means my real-life friends who have no interest in my professional life/interests don't want to follow me here because I flood their stream with info that they don't care about. So I have a personal account where I share motorcycle stuff or tidbits about my life that only friends would care about. Two accounts for two "me's".

Grand experiment, but broken.

** added **
Then there's the permalink issue -- the link to the original post doesn't carry-over with a share. That's stupid and I can't believe it hasn't been fixed.
Photo
Photo
Google+ Circles (2 photos)
2 Photos - View album

Post has shared content

Post has attachment
Photo from birthday bicycle ride to the deschutes river!
Photo

Post has attachment
This morning I was writing the date on the jars of pickles (pickles!) and remembered that my grandmother was born in '11. And that her birthday was in August. So: tomorrow my mother's mother would've been 100 years old.

FWIW, she was a city gal, more about store-bought butter cookies than canned anything. Born in NYC, died in southern CA (2005). Lived most of her life, as far as I can tell, in the pleasant suburb of Arcadia. Both of my grandmothers grew up as city girls, as it happens, dad's mom in Pasadena, even if she spent her last years in the middle of nowhere Arizona.

As for the photo, that's blueberry-lime jam, spiced blackberry jam, dill pickles, refrigerated apricot jam, and strawberry freezer jam. (I have a LOT of strawberry freezer jam, I realized yesterday. Something like 10 half-pints!)
Photo

Post has shared content
Via +Nancy Picchi - it's interesting to me that the effect was significant for people doing excruciatingly boring mundane tasks. And how often are those the folks who get their internet access restricted?!
Super interesting study and piece in the Wall Street Journal...

Post has shared content
Indeed. I'm still bummed that Oakwright isn't here anymore.

Original link: https://plus.google.com/115992243655450055250/posts/Sf7W9uG14ZD
Probably the last post I'll write here about the real names issue

TL;DR version: I don't care about Google's identity politics, it's just that this place is fucking empty.

The only real reason why I follow the debate so intently is that a large majority of people in my social circle won't join Google Plus because they think Google doesn't want them on it, an impression created both by Google's policy and their enforcing of it.

The rest won't join because they (quite rightly) think Google Plus is almost solely populated by geeks.

Most of these people aren't that up on the specifics of the policy, they just hear of the rampant banhammering.

So, my interest is not ideological. It's just that if the policy isn't changed I'll probably have to mothball my Google Plus account. Not in protest, not because I need pseudonym support, not because I'm offended or insulted by the service, but because social software isn't useful to me if it doesn't have my social network on it.

You'll find that this is what's at the heart of most people's interest in this kerfuffle. There's a lot of talk of principles, privilege, and such in the posts themselves, but whenever you look at the comments you'll find people complaining that their people aren't on G+, have left G+, have been banned from G+, or they can't find them on G+ because they're here under their wallet names which they aren't familiar with.

Then the debate gets emotional because people interpret Google's moves as specifically targeting their community, which is silly, of course, but by now the debate has stopped being rational.

None of that really matters. I decided a while back I'd give this service to the end of August and Google isn't likely to do anything before the 31st to bring into the fold enough of the people I'm interested in.

And, yes, this is triggered by Ian's post here: https://plus.google.com/117617463050753227430/posts/YyRkPfBHr1v

He should feel free to ignore this post :-)

ETA: I should note that activity in my circles has dropped off a cliff over the last couple of weeks. At this rate I'm not sure I'll even last the month.

Post has attachment
Apricot jam! My first ever cooked jam! Only...I forgot to add the lemon juice after cooking the apricots & sugar. The little dab I had left over this morning tasted good on yogurt, altho I can see how the lemon would've cut the sweetness a bit.

I'm wondering whether the lack of acid is going to have an effect on the shelf life, and if so, should I turn it into freezer jam? Give one away & eat the other?

Thoughts?
Photo
Wait while more posts are being loaded