<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Proposal: How to Deal with Facebook&#8217;s Games Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/2009/12/11/a-proposal-how-to-deal-with-facebooks-games-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/2009/12/11/a-proposal-how-to-deal-with-facebooks-games-problem/</link>
	<description>All About the Data Around Marketing, Social Media, Games and More</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:26:31 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: EVCinNYC</title>
		<link>http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/2009/12/11/a-proposal-how-to-deal-with-facebooks-games-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-1059</link>
		<dc:creator>EVCinNYC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:22:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/?p=590#comment-1059</guid>
		<description>I think the interesting thing is that in a Facebook world, you are never truly annonymous.  If the &quot;Game Friend&quot; is implemented with limited ability to access your wall, status, photos then your privacy is pretty well protected; with regard to posts, they would primarily be game-driven posts, so this too somewhat limits the ability for mischeif -- plus ideally users could remove a Game Friend as easily as they remove posts from an application today.

With regard to the public, a form of the idea is already taking off.  There is a Facebook Group (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=222703023938&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=222703023938&lt;/a&gt; that already has 100,000 members pushing for some aspects of the change!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the interesting thing is that in a Facebook world, you are never truly annonymous.  If the &#8220;Game Friend&#8221; is implemented with limited ability to access your wall, status, photos then your privacy is pretty well protected; with regard to posts, they would primarily be game-driven posts, so this too somewhat limits the ability for mischeif &#8212; plus ideally users could remove a Game Friend as easily as they remove posts from an application today.</p>
<p>With regard to the public, a form of the idea is already taking off.  There is a Facebook Group (<a href="http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=222703023938" rel="nofollow">http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=222703023938</a> that already has 100,000 members pushing for some aspects of the change!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexander Liss</title>
		<link>http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/2009/12/11/a-proposal-how-to-deal-with-facebooks-games-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-1051</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexander Liss</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:15:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.voncoelln.com/eric/?p=590#comment-1051</guid>
		<description>Good idea! 

I wonder though if there is a possible downside to creating an official &quot;friend class&quot; of people who are in effect, completely anonymous? This is how gaming lists work on consoles and it creates the possibility down the road of bad behabior (such as Xbox Live is legendary for).

Also you wonder what &quot;the public&quot; will think. For example, Facebook&#039;s recent changes to its Privacy setting drew a huge backlash from the ACLU. Even though it was fundamentally an attempt to make users safer, it was perceived as having the opposite effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good idea! </p>
<p>I wonder though if there is a possible downside to creating an official &#8220;friend class&#8221; of people who are in effect, completely anonymous? This is how gaming lists work on consoles and it creates the possibility down the road of bad behabior (such as Xbox Live is legendary for).</p>
<p>Also you wonder what &#8220;the public&#8221; will think. For example, Facebook&#8217;s recent changes to its Privacy setting drew a huge backlash from the ACLU. Even though it was fundamentally an attempt to make users safer, it was perceived as having the opposite effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
