Remove the G+ button

[Andem]

WebmasterWorld is probably the best site overall when it comes to discussing many topics we all deal with on a daily basis. Why, oh why does WW sport the Google+ button at the end of every thread?

Many here are aware of the power and reach of Google, the sometimes unethical practices that the company has been involved in and the completely mythical nature of Google. Heck, moderators of this very site have hinted at the potential evils and disadvantages of having anything to do with Google.

Why on earth does the Google+ button exist on almost every single page here? It provides virtually no benefit to WebmasterWorld and one can only debate how much data Google uses to build a profile of somebody. (This is a question of how much, not IF).

This is more of a concern for webmasters than anybody else.

What benefit does the G+ button provide users here?

Until this question is answered, I will continue to remain skeptical about which threads I even dare to read. Having this useless button on threads is detrimental to the community here.

[Skorpios]

If the new owners were to place a whole host of options of how to share links i.e. facebook, google and the many other options out there would that make things better or worse?

[lexipixel]

The question from the OP was why is the Google+ script there at all?

I'll take a guess: Someone probably thought that putting it on a page would add some algo points.

I decided a long time ago to remove all social buttons from all my sites. The last thing I was going to do was take a visitor I worked hard to get and send them off to browse at FB, G+ or anywhere else.

I know, some will say "but think of all the free referral traffic you could get from those people's friends" --- phooey... I spent many months posting and watching the stats on FB and traffic "for the effort" ranged from abysmal to non-existent.

What if Google decides that well aged pages with ZERO "+1's" are not sending traffic to G+ and thus should rank lower?...

[Samizdata]

If the new owners were to place a whole host of options of how to share links i.e. facebook, google and the many other options out there would that make things better or worse?

Better or worse for whom?

Better for site owners may not be the same as better for site users.

Site owners can generally do as they please (and long may it continue).

This topic is about why a particular site owner has a particular policy.

No answer from the site owner has been forthcoming.

And nothing else is really relevant to the question.

...

[lucy24]

Different time zone over here...

I sense hostility, you may be better off living in a country where dictatorship is the norm

wtf?

"You disagree with me" = "You would be happier under a dictatorship".

The next time I am asked for an example of a non sequitur, I will know where to look.

"Moot point" is one of those awkward terms whose meaning is in the process of flip-flopping. It may be too late to stop it; let's concentrate on, say, "Beg the question". I think that one can still be saved.*


* Almost by definition, any language change other than simple lexical additions began as an error. But it does not follow that any and all errors are changes in the making. Some are simply ... errors.

[Skorpios]

Well the only thing I can say the more members encouraged to have a voice has got to be for the better and that includes new members. Whether you are like me and only been a member for 5 minutes or someone who has been on this site since day one with 5,6 or 7000 posts, everyone has a right to an opinion.

As to the original question, Google+, well there will only be a few voices that can truly answer that.

[Leosghost]

everyone has a right to an opinion.

Biting my tongue here ..:)

As to the original question, Google+, well there will only be a few voices that can truly answer that.

Some of us have been aware of that fact since the start of the thread..

[Skorpios]

Well free speech is a right I do believe, after all if you don't agree with free speech the alternative has been tried in the past and although still exists in many countries if the government of the country you are in decided to block all the sites trying to stop free speech would you be there protesting your rights, I know I would.

[Leosghost]

if the government of the country you are in decided to block all the sites trying to stop free speech would you be there protesting your rights,

?
You might want to add a few more commas in there, as it stands, that reads as the exact opposite of what I think you meant it to..:)

[Swanny007]

So is it safe to say by now that an admin doesn't want to answer the original question? I see Brett, the old owner around here more than the "new" owner.

Oh, and to keep it on-topic, I'm curious too. I try to minimize my "dependence" on G stuff and I'm pleased to say I haven't signed up for the G+ creepware yet.

[incrediBILL]

<mod>
I normally don't do this in public but I didn't have the time to write a bunch of individual sticky mails as I could feel a level of tension building in this thread.

I sense hostility

Please don't get personal as some can misconstrue opinions that disagree as personal attacks which isn't the intent at all, just one of the many pitfalls of online communication.

Let's keep the discussion on the topic and not on the personalities discussing it and everything will be fine.

Just remember TOS #4 and all will be fine:

Always be respectful of other users, the system, and the moderators. We put the system online in good faith, please use it in good faith.

If you have any questions about this post, remember TOS #24:

Discussions about moderator or administrator actions are welcome in email or local private messages, but should not be discussed in public forums. This is out of respect for the members and moderators or policy involved.

Which basically means I'll delete any comments on this moderation post.

Play nice, keep on the topic and not the personalities and enjoy a nice debate.

Thanks
</mod>

[Samizdata]

So is it safe to say by now that an admin doesn't want to answer the original question?

I doubt that an administrator would be authorised - policy is for site owners.

But I wouldn't rule out the possibility of an answer just yet.

It is, after all, a very simple and entirely reasonable question.

Why, oh why does WW sport the Google+ button at the end of every thread?

Perhaps if someone gave the thread a +1 the OP might get a response.

...

[kerrykob]

OP, you can do the following:

Use Firefox and install the Ghostery add-on which will let you block sites of your choosing.

But you really need to pull back and see a bigger picture.

After you install it, go around the Net and visit various sites. You will see wherever you go, you are being tracked.

Tracking is everywhere, not just with the Google+ button. If you are asking WebmasterWorld to take it off, you might as well complain about the Twitter button as well.

Then, head over to every website you visit and ask them to remove whatever trackers they have their too. I'm sure you will agree that this would be a waste of time and you would get nowhere.

But at least you got a solution with my suggestion above.

[Leosghost]

Use Firefox and install the Ghostery add-on which will let you block sites of your choosing.

The OP and many others of us know this already..we have been doing this rather a long time..you can see by our join dates :)

If you are asking WebmasterWorld to take it off, you might as well complain about the Twitter button as well.

You don't seem to understand how the G+ button works, certainly not if you think it is the same as a twitter button..

Oh and twitter don't own the equivalent of ganalytics, doubleclick, adsense and search..when you are not on twitter or facebook, and not on a page with their buttons, they have no idea what you are looking at or searching for..nor do they know who you are..

You need to research what is really the difference between buttons and who sets them and how they appear on pages..in order to make "informed" suggestions..

But as has been said many times already here ..the OP ..and many others of us are not looking to hear "suggestions" that we already know about..

The questions about the G+ button..are.. why was it put here ? ..and why is it here now..?


Only the previous owner and the new owner can answer that..

[incrediBILL]

Pardon me for not doing this in my previous post.

Why, oh why does WW sport the Google+ button at the end of every thread?

This isn't official, but as far as I know the G+, Twitter and I thought we used to have Facebook Likes but I don't see them anymore if we did have them, is simply social media integration making it easy for people to share and also indicate what threads have more value than others.

Social Media integration is a large part of the new interactive landscape and these features make it easier for people to share things they find on WebmasterWorld and I would expect more in the future, not less.

For instance, I'd like to be able to use OpenAuth to login using my Twitter, Facebook or G+ account instead of maintaining a separate WebmasterWorld account and who knows, maybe some day that will also be an option.

Embracing it all and loving it.

FYI, I wish the WebmasterWorld UI was also redesigned using Twitter Bootstrap so it would work better on my smart phone and tablet too. Who knows!

[Samizdata]

I thought we used to have Facebook Likes but I don't see them anymore if we did have them

There was certainly a FaceBook button (possibly Share) for a while.

And now there isn't.

This, for me, is what makes the original question interesting.

simply social media integration making it easy for people to share

My understanding is that "everybody" uses FaceBook and "nobody" uses Google+.

So "making it easy for people" does not compute in this case.

I'd like to be able to use OpenAuth to login using my Twitter, Facebook or G+ account

Sorry, FaceBook is not accepted here.

Apparently some data miners are more equal than others.

But nobody seems to know why that might be.

...

[lucy24]

I'd like to be able to use OpenAuth to login using my Twitter, Facebook or G+ account

You mean, the way you can log in to one of g's tentacles and if you forget to log out, you find yourself pre-logged-in next week when you happen to visit one of the other tentacles?

No thanks.

[incrediBILL]

You mean, the way you can log in to one of g's tentacles and if you forget to log out, you find yourself pre-logged-in next week when you happen to visit one of the other tentacles?

Well I tend to use my Twitter account, not Gooogle, but I don't mind still being logged in as it's all annoying and I like being able to get access without jumping thru hoops.

Seriously, I have hundreds of passwords, maybe thousands, it's simple too much and OpenAuth solves the problem.

Not like I'd want to use it for banking for anything like that, but the forums and blogs I visit and post on regularly would most certainly be fine to have a single login.

It also avoids the problem of someone trying to steal your online name and fake an account in your name because everyone would know your Twitter/Facebook/G+ account was the real thing, especially if it's verified :)

My understanding is that "everybody" uses FaceBook and "nobody" uses Google+.

Who are you calling a nobody?

Guess I know a bunch of nobodies then.

Seriously, I was surprised when a bunch of my old school techie friends jumped all over the G+ stuff and now use it as their primary social media site.

Plus I'm sure G+ may also be used as a signal in Google Search, or will be soon, kind of like voting up an article in Digg back in the day.

[kerrykob]

LeosGhost:

Now I remember why I left this place after being on here over the years. Guys like you who make posts like this really make the community an unfriendly place.

FWIW I have participated in WebmasterWorld since 2002 and have been webmastering since 1996. This is my second account here on WebmasterWorld.

I don't need a lecture from you. I merely made a suggestion TO THE OP, not to you.

Excuse me for not realizing you speak for the OP. Excuse me for not making the connection that he already knows about Ghostery.

Then again, you don't know that and are just being an ass.

[engine]

We will be reviewing all social media aspects of this site in the coming weeks and will take on board all that's been said.

I think this discussion has run it's course, thanks for participating.