| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | KudoZ and Konfidentiality Thread poster: Susanna Garcia
|
|---|
| OT: rejecting LinkedIn and Facebook connections | Sep 19, 2011 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: Well, the fun starts when you learn to dislike one person along the months you have seen his/her comments, questions, and forum posts... and receive an invitation from this person to be connected in Linkedin or Facebook. These situations give me a chance to retaliate in the most futile manner, i.e. ignoring or rejecting the connection. 
I don’t like people rejecting connections, but there are a couple of points here that might be a little bit misleading:
Actually, as I not-so-happily found out a few weeks ago, one of these actions will actually cause trouble to the person requesting the connection: rejecting a LinkedIn connection. LinkedIn is not upfront at all about the adverse effects of the action (it’s buried in the FAQ and is not shown when they ask you if you want to reject), and I’m not sure how many people have innocently caused trouble for people whom they do not mean to “retaliate”.
Rejecting a LinkedIn connection (the I don’t know this person option), as opposed to simply ignoring, is really more like “report as spam”; milder, but still extremely nasty if you asked me.
None of the other actions are IMHO really “retaliations” per se, especially the ones on Facebook. Since a long time ago, “rejecting” a Facebook connection has become merely the equivalent of burying your head in the sand (if you’re not sure why people keep bashing Facebook for its privacy policies, this can give you an idea). On Facebook, an action that is perceived as unfriendly is unfriending the person, or, more discreetly (but still perceived to be very unfriendly if they find out), putting the person on Limited Profile, both of these mean you must first accept the connection.
Now I’m not sure if I should have clarified these things… I don’t think anyone other than true spammers deserves to be rejected on LinkedIn.
(PS: I just found out that an invisible connection will still linger after you unfriend a person. I don’t know, but as they say, retaliations have consequences.)
[Edited at 2011-09-19 17:20 GMT]
| | | | | Nonsense connections | Sep 19, 2011 |
Ambrose Li wrote:
Now I’m not sure if I should have clarified these things… I don’t think anyone other than true spammers deserves to be rejected on LinkedIn.
Well, all I can say is that, in the case of LinkedIn, I don't know where the rejection button is, so I simply click the Ignore button. Now that I know that there is somewhere a rejection button, I will look for it to be able to use it when needed.
I really think people set strange expectations in LinkedIn and Facebook: how on earth would I like to be connected to a person I have never met in person, I have never done business with, and I have never communicated with in private? Just because they want to be connected to me? Well, I am flattered, but I don't know what is the sense of such a connection, and I think it is my right to ignore or reject, as I feel appropriate.
(Edited to add this:)
This is the text in the LinkedIn FAQ:
When you click the "I don't know this person" link after clicking Ignore, this prevents the person you don't know from reinviting you in the future. If someone receives an excessive number of "I don't know this person" responses, they could be restricted from sending invitations to connect to others.
Well, if this is how it works, it's perfect! People who invite with no consideration and no idea as to whether the invited person is at all interested (i.e. people who make other people lose their valuable time) should be restricted from inviting.
[Edited at 2011-09-19 19:41 GMT]
| | | | | OT: LinkedIn’s strange presuppositions | Sep 19, 2011 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: This is the text in the LinkedIn FAQ:
When you click the "I don't know this person" link after clicking Ignore, this prevents the person you don't know from reinviting you in the future. If someone receives an excessive number of "I don't know this person" responses, they could be restricted from sending invitations to connect to others.
Personally speaking, I can’t quite understand the logic behind this. If you don’t know this person, how can they guarantee that you will not know this person, say, two years later? I would have agreed to the way this works if (1) they are upfront about it and (2) it’s not permanent. As it is, this is only making LinkedIn look… what should I say? Very careless in its modelling?
Well, if this is how it works, it's perfect! People who invite with no consideration and no idea as to whether the invited person is at all interested (i.e. people who make other people lose their valuable time) should be restricted from inviting.
[Edited at 2011-09-19 19:41 GMT]
I’m not so sure about this. Ever since I found out what “I don’t know this person” actually does, before I send a LinkedIn request to someone I only know through the net I’d first PM the person for permission. Now which takes the person more time? Answering my PM, or just pressing the Ignore button? I bet pressing the Ignore button would take less time =S
(I should probably stop now, since I’m not really contributing anything useful to this discussion except for this little aside.)
[Edited at 2011-09-19 19:59 GMT]
| | | | | Which brings the question... | Sep 20, 2011 |
Ambrose Li wrote:
I’m not so sure about this. Ever since I found out what “I don’t know this person” actually does, before I send a LinkedIn request to someone I only know through the net I’d first PM the person for permission. Now which takes the person more time? Answering my PM, or just pressing the Ignore button? I bet pressing the Ignore button would take less time =S
(Sorry if this is still off-topic. I think it is important.)
But, let me ask you this: why would you be interested in being linked to a complete stranger (the result of a single "permission email" is far from being a solid source of information about anybody)? To me you risk being linked to a moron or someone who could be bad for your business or your peace of mind.
In LinkedIn or Facebook, you certainly only want to be connected to people you know well and have learned to trust after numerous contacts and even business. In Spain we have this saying: "Dime con quien andas y te diré quién eres." (Tell me who you go around with, and I will tell you who you are).
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall 
United Kingdom
Local time: 20:48
Hebrew to English
| A few things...... | Sep 20, 2011 |
1. KudoZ and Konfidentiality
This is just naïvety and/or ignorance.... to reveal anything remotely sensitive.
2. Ambrose & Tomás LinkedIn & Facebook thing
I think there's a line you have to draw, you have to have a thick skin and not be afraid of hurting people's feelings with a "reject/ignore" button - if they do take such a thing personally then I would question their professionalism / maturity...but anyway...
A very simple principle... See more 1. KudoZ and Konfidentiality
This is just naïvety and/or ignorance.... to reveal anything remotely sensitive.
2. Ambrose & Tomás LinkedIn & Facebook thing
I think there's a line you have to draw, you have to have a thick skin and not be afraid of hurting people's feelings with a "reject/ignore" button - if they do take such a thing personally then I would question their professionalism / maturity...but anyway...
A very simple principle is just not to request links with people you don't know. You should only send requests to people you KNOW will accept. Consequently, you won't have the threat of being restricted looming over you.
Ambrose:
"If you don’t know this person, how can they guarantee that you will not know this person, say, two years later?"
The answer to this is to follow the principle above, if you don't know this person, don't add/request them, if you end up getting chummy with them in 2 years, then add them in 2 years. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | OT: connection requests | Sep 20, 2011 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
But, let me ask you this: why would you be interested in being linked to a complete stranger (the result of a single "permission email" is far from being a solid source of information about anybody)? To me you risk being linked to a moron or someone who could be bad for your business or your peace of mind.
In LinkedIn or Facebook, you certainly only want to be connected to people you know well and have learned to trust after numerous contacts and even business. […]
Well, to make it clear, I don’t send random LinkedIn connection requests to complete strangers. The problem is in the “grey area” of people you know somewhat but not close (such as a “business contact”).
The thing is that “thanks to” spammers and the resulting often-overzealous anti-spam efforts, email is no longer the trusty medium it once was, and some alternate communication channel needs to be in place. Using LinkedIn as that alternate communication channel for a “business contact” would, IMHO, make a lot of sense; it is sad that the designers of these networks (or should I say hackers, since neither of these networks seems to be actually designed) haven’t taken this very real use case into consideration.
Concrete example: You are the volunteer coordinator of some largish organization (say a hospital) and you use LinkedIn/Facebook as an alternative/additional channel of communications. You sent the request to the wrong person by mistake (this has happened to me—I mean I got sent a random request, due to a mistake on LinkedIn’s part), and the person says they don’t know you. But did you do anything wrong? Hardly.
So people can get permanently penalized for design flaws (or should I say a lack of proper design) in LinkedIn. No matter how I look at this this isn’t right.
Ty Kendall wrote:
A very simple principle is just not to request links with people you don't know. You should only send requests to people you KNOW will accept. Consequently, you won't have the threat of being restricted looming over you.
Unfortunately people you know (even in real life) do not necessarily always accept your connection requests. And you do not necessarily recognize who it is that is requesting a connection with you, even if you actually know the person in real life. Despite the best intentions, mistakes can occur, and on LinkedIn we can be permanently penalized even for innocent mistakes.
[Edited at 2011-09-20 08:47 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 20:48
Hebrew to English
| A solution.... | Sep 20, 2011 |
Ambrose Li wrote:
Unfortunately people you know (even in real life) do not necessarily always accept your connection requests. And you do not necessarily recognize who it is that is requesting a connection with you, even if you actually know the person in real life.
[Edited at 2011-09-20 08:42 GMT]
In that case, if you really want to add someone who may or may not reject your request, then send them a message/email first to politely ask for their consent before you try to add them. That way, if the person in question has a preference not to add mere acquaintances , then they can inform you beforehand, before you send a request that will be rejected and risk you being restricted by site staff.
If someone sends me a request and I don't recognise them, then that is usually reason enough to deny/reject this request.
There are categories of people you "know" in life:
1. Friends ("real" friends who you know/met in real life)
2. Work colleagues (people you work quite closely with, business partners)
3. Acquaintances (people you know of, maybe even work with, but in a limited capacity).
Everybody has to decide which kind of people they will make connections with online and in social media. What's important is to respect people's choice in who they want/don't want to add.
Personally, I'll add friends, and (most) work colleagues, but it gets murky when it comes to acquaintances. Also, I refuse to add most of my childhood friends, I haven't seen or spoke to these people in years, they are so far removed from me now that I see no reason (other than nostalgia) to grant them access to my online information. So I understand that these "gray areas" exist, but you just have to acknowledge this fact.
Your concrete example is, I would say, the exception rather than the rule.
If you have solid business reasons for a connection on LinkedIn , then by all means, explain this to the person you want a connection with and they can judge its merits.
Email isn't perfect, but I'm not convinced it is any more flawed (in security matters) than LinkedIn & Facebook - with all the profile hacking that goes on and all.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » KudoZ and Konfidentiality | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
