Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Deletes Social Fixer Community Page Without Explanation

New submitter ComradeF writes "Matt Kruse, author of the Social Fixer for Facebook browser extension, warns users of the dangers of building a community on a platform that can and will shut you down on a whim: 'It's gone. Years of work and almost 340,000 fans, wiped out. Erased. I have never been given any details about what "community standards" I was apparently violating (because I wasn't). This is a case of Facebook choosing to shut down someone's business just because they want to, not because they were doing anything wrong. This is extremely frustrating and disappointing to me, and should be to others as well.' The administrators and moderators of his Page found that their personal Facebook accounts have been silenced for 12 hours, as well." I've recently installed Social Fixer, and find it tremendously useful; this news just inspired me to donate a few bucks to Kruse — cheaper than what Mark Zuckerberg would like to hear my complaint.

19 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by teknopurge · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a company providing APIs and encouraging development on your platform is great as long as you maintain control. The problem with APIs is apps can, provided the APIs provide enough of the right data, totally remove your influence in favor of the developer using your APIs. I first saw this Social Fixer app a few weeks back and I immediately thought "finally, someone that will remind us who owns facebook: the users." Facebook will have no revenue if they cannot monetize the marketing of their site, and with free APIs they can't do that. Paid APIs? Devs want free access, so you'll kill your dev community if you start charging.

    1. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope. This story is about this guy crying because FB is finally being fair. They've shut down several other extensions which alter how FB pages are rendered, and that's what his extension does. He even posts a link to an Ars Technica article about him and his extension, which clearly explains what happened to other people who tried making extensions that alter the page rendering. Here's what FB's legal team said to one of those other authors:

      "Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities prohibits integrations that impair the proper working or appearance of Facebook, including those that interfere with page rendering Your extension was reported as interfering with and/or impairing site functionality and page rendering and links to your site have been blocked.”

      Here's the full Ars Article: http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/08/meet-matt-kruse-the-man-making-facebook-better/

    2. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The users don't own Facebook. The users are the product that Facebook sells to advertisers.

    3. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by Entropius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This really tells it in a nutshell.

      This extension doesn't "interfere with or impair" the USER at all -- in fact, it does what the user wants.

      Now we know for whose benefit that nonsense is written (like we didn't before, but meh...)

    4. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's the same lame-ass argument those serving ads whine over -- you shouldn't have control over how to present the page or block parts of it which is total bullocks.

      When I look at content -- I want it tailored for me -- so I can quickly separate the noise from the signal.

      If some company wants to cry that somebody is making their content MORE valuable by providing OPTIONS for how people view then they are being extremely short-sighted and not understanding the value the community brings.

      Blizzard learnt this by _allowing_ custom UI mods in World of Warcraft. Years later the best mods have become built into the game. /sarcasm Oh noes! "Someone is altering our page rendering" Quick, sue the browser makers!!

    5. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by FreonTrip · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The answer's simple: Facebook wants their interface to be gobbledygook because that means you're spending more time on the site, and having to mentally filter relevant content from the ads they want you to see. By the logic of someone creating an attractive nuisance, interfering with this kind of product makes a perverse sense because it's making the product better for users but worse for Facebook's actual customers - advertisers and marketers.

    6. Re:It's pretty simple actually - Do Some Evil. by AdamThor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As in so many cases dealing with a free or subsidized service, remember that users != customers, and it will become clear why user complaints aren't really important to the company.

      This lesson can be generalized.

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
  2. Of course Facebook killed it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It lets mere users control what they see on their own Facebook pages, rather than Facebook and advertisers determining it.

    What was he thinking?

    1. Re:Of course Facebook killed it! by i+kan+reed · · Score: 5, Funny

      To be completely fair, it was highly irresponsible to not do everything you're told to by a corporation. They want what's best for everyone.

    2. Re:Of course Facebook killed it! by realityimpaired · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is just client side, and it does still work.

      They blocked the Facebook fan page for it.

  3. Owned! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's EXACTLY what you get when you don't own the server on which your "site" is based. Regardless of the user agreement, TOS, or whatever, this will happen on any such site. You were immensely naive to have not realised this to begin.
     
    captcha: unkindly
     
    Sorry, but some times, the truth hurts. :(

  4. Simple Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He writes an application that runs on top of your browser when it's looking at facebook. why not throw in some code to re-imagine his fan page the way it was before? This could serve as the start of a way to wean users from facebook altogether, give them a little real content mixed with more open data (like a social media aggregator) and eventually replace the entire facebook experience with an aggregated one that can share/source on any platform. that way, when one provider does something silly (or vengeful, whatever) the app just routes around it.

  5. Not Surprising at all! by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Facebook got rid of something that took away their control over how the users interacted with FB's pages. Is that surprising? FB wants direct interaction and monitoring of its cattle so that it can package up their information to sell to the highest bidder. Why would they tolerate anything that threatens that by giving users better control over their use of the site. It might hide some useful information that they are gathering by the inefficient design they have created.

    Facebook: always remember you are the product, not the customer. The customers are Big Business (and now the NSA apparently) :P

    This is why every single user should delete their FB account.

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    1. Re:Not Surprising at all! by bmo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >This is why every single user should delete their FB account.

      And go where, Yahoo, G+, Geocities?

      Even Usenet is harvested 100 different ways to Sunday.

      All these posts in this thread saying "stop interacting with big business." Have y'all looked around? Try doing that without becoming a hermit living in the woods. The battle has been lost, folks.

      "B...but Diaspora!" Diaspora is slow and to really take advantage of it, you have to run your own server, which means that 99 percent of users can't even wrap their heads around the concept.

      >NSA

      They're in the NOCs. Good luck with that.

      --
      BMO

  6. Ideas.... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Like every updated forcing me to "like" his page automatically, so I have to unlike it on every update. That's kind of scummy for his greasemonkey script to auto like pages.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  7. Re:Warning: Cynicism Inside: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, the class and critical thinking of slashdot on display, yet again.

    I detest these, "I'm not sayin', just sayin'" kinds of comments online.

    Let's try something new:

    If you're accusing the people involved of pulling a scam like the one you describe, then come right out and say it, and provide your evidence.

    If you can't/won't do that, then STFU.

  8. Hmmmm .... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    his is a case of Facebook choosing to shut down someone's business just because they want to, not because they were doing anything wrong.

    Isn't one of the things Social Fixer is doing is trying to prevent Facebook et al from tracking you?

    So, if you have a community page on Facebook detailing how to block some of Facebook's functionality ... then maybe you chose the wrong platform to do this one?

    Facebook doesn't owe you your business, but superficially (and possibly incorrectly) it seems like Facebook might be annoyed you're using their system to bypass/alter some of the elements of Facebook.

    Facebook can't say a damned thing if you host this elsewhere -- but isn't this is kind of like expecting Microsoft to host articles detailing how to pirate Microsoft products?

    Welcome to the world of Terms of Service and EULAs, where the people who own the service can and will make any changes they want and you don't get a vote.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  9. Re:Warning: Cynicism Inside: by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In this specific case, if you are telling people to distrust Facebook, with a Facebook group, you'll get a lot of blog posts and Twitting if you shut down the Facebook group with no warning.

    To be blunt, you have to wonder if people like this are more a part of the problem than the solution they purport to be.

    The real- and obvious- fundamental problem is how Facebook operates their site. This company's product merely papers over the symptoms with a "solution" that doesn't address the real issue, and will only *ever* be short term, breakable at a whim by Facebook themselves. But by making Facebook more palatable over the short term, they hide this problem and encourage people to stay with the site.

    It's a waste of effort that might annoy Facebook but ultimately plays into their hands. Fundamentally, if it doesn't encourage Facebook to change their behaviour and/or policies *or* work on moving people away to another service- or whatever- then it's still a part of the Facebook ecosystem and encouraging its use (and hence supporting its cynical behaviour and discouraging other, more responsible approaches to social networking).

    Of course, it might suit *them* from a business point-of-view to be doing this anyway, but for everyone else it's not so great.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  10. Near the end of the cycle for Facebook by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Social Network Website Cycle:
    1. New social network site (SNS) starts, targeting a very small group of individuals. It's small, it's clean, it's easy to use, it helps people stay in touch with their friends, so a significant percentage of that target group joins up.
    2. SNS targets a bunch of other similar groups, and the site starts growing.
    3. SNS targets progressively wider groups until it's now millions of users.
    4. Now, it opens itself to the public.
    5. Once the user base is sufficiently large, it sells out, either via an IPO or a private sale.
    6. The people who just bought it try to "monetize" those users by selling them advertising, related apps, etc.
    7. Eventually, the users start getting fed up because the ads are too intrusive, the related apps are expensive and not useful or fun, and of course the SNS is taking people's personal information for their own use.
    8. A new SNS starts with some small target audience to rectify the bloated annoyance of the dominant SNS, and the cycle begins again.

    We've been through this a couple of times, already, and Facebook is somewhere around step 7. They'd like to stay in stages 6-7 for as long as possible.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/