What I'm going to write today is not wise at all. On the contrary it's rather stupid.
I went on the members list and discovered that today, on the second day of the new "regime" I have the highest number of friends registered within the whole community (despite a number of pending connections I launched and an even higher number of friends I know I'll reconnect with, within the next few days, as soon as the ten invites per day limit will allow us to finish rebuilding our networks).
That doesn't mean much, I know... It's influenced by who's around, who logged in, etc.
But it made me feel liked!
Thank you all, friends!
Global Forums > General > I feel good. Thanks
Only members can see names and photos
I feel good. Thanks
Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:14
The text you are quoting:
What I'm going to write today is not wise at all. On the contrary it's rather stupid.
I went on the members list and discovered that today, on the second day of the new "regime" I have the highest number of friends registered within the whole community (despite a number of pending connections I launched and an even higher number of friends I know I'll reconnect with, within the next few days, as soon as the ten invites per day limit will allow us to finish rebuilding our networks).
That doesn't mean much, I know... It's influenced by who's around, who logged in, etc.
But it made me feel liked!
Thank you all, friends!
Stef__GrannySep 19, 2006 @ 19:14
I went on the members list and discovered that today, on the second day of the new "regime" I have the highest number of friends registered within the whole community (despite a number of pending connections I launched and an even higher number of friends I know I'll reconnect with, within the next few days, as soon as the ten invites per day limit will allow us to finish rebuilding our networks).
That doesn't mean much, I know... It's influenced by who's around, who logged in, etc.
But it made me feel liked!
Thank you all, friends!
Stef__GrannySep 19, 2006 @ 19:14
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 1
Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:22
you are my number one, sab_ge is my number two and i am the third.
we are the cool crowd, let´s get some champagne and pretend we are something special because of this. ;-)
we are the cool crowd, let´s get some champagne and pretend we are something special because of this. ;-)
The text you are quoting:
you are my number one, sab_ge is my number two and i am the third.
we are the cool crowd, let´s get some champagne and pretend we are something special because of this. ;-)
Mister_Sark, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:22
we are the cool crowd, let´s get some champagne and pretend we are something special because of this. ;-)
Mister_Sark, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:22
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 2
Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:27
funny how i also felt good sending invites to my friends and receiving notice that they'd accepted.... we've been through that already, but it's good to see that, even though some of them i've not seen in a while, they're still there and still care !!!
LOVE YOU GUYS (AND GIRLS) !!!!!! :-)
LOVE YOU GUYS (AND GIRLS) !!!!!! :-)
The text you are quoting:
funny how i also felt good sending invites to my friends and receiving notice that they'd accepted.... we've been through that already, but it's good to see that, even though some of them i've not seen in a while, they're still there and still care !!!
LOVE YOU GUYS (AND GIRLS) !!!!!! :-)
addaxnat, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:27
LOVE YOU GUYS (AND GIRLS) !!!!!! :-)
addaxnat, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:27
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 3
Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:43
even with the technical problem yesterday (couldn't invite anyone :S ) ... :)
So good to feel liked :)
Vale - BEFRIENDLY
So good to feel liked :)
Vale - BEFRIENDLY
The text you are quoting:
even with the technical problem yesterday (couldn't invite anyone :S ) ... :)
So good to feel liked :)
Vale - BEFRIENDLY
Hoiling, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:43
So good to feel liked :)
Vale - BEFRIENDLY
Hoiling, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:43
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 4
Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:52
Its about quality not quantity...no?
The text you are quoting:
Its about quality not quantity...no?
nancy, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:52
nancy, Sep 19, 2006 @ 19:52
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 5
Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:19
it's nice to see how many of our 'old' friends added us back so quickly. I knew they were friends but .. couldn't help thinking .. what if they don't like me anymore?
once we got the quality ... it's nice to see that all of my old friends still like me ;). Make me feel .. 'wanted' as a friend by my friends.
Vale
once we got the quality ... it's nice to see that all of my old friends still like me ;). Make me feel .. 'wanted' as a friend by my friends.
Vale
The text you are quoting:
it's nice to see how many of our 'old' friends added us back so quickly. I knew they were friends but .. couldn't help thinking .. what if they don't like me anymore?
once we got the quality ... it's nice to see that all of my old friends still like me ;). Make me feel .. 'wanted' as a friend by my friends.
Vale
Hoiling, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:19
once we got the quality ... it's nice to see that all of my old friends still like me ;). Make me feel .. 'wanted' as a friend by my friends.
Vale
Hoiling, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:19
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 6
Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:26
And I feel happy of having an awful lot of astonishngly interesting, funny, generous and good friends :-)
The text you are quoting:
And I feel happy of having an awful lot of astonishngly interesting, funny, generous and good friends :-)
Stef__Granny, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:26
Stef__Granny, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:26
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 7
Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:31
... I stated clearly that I wasn't going to say anything wise! ;-P
The text you are quoting:
... I stated clearly that I wasn't going to say anything wise! ;-P
Stef__Granny, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:31
Stef__Granny, Sep 19, 2006 @ 20:31
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 8
Sep 19, 2006 @ 21:36
Did somebody call me? hehehe
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 9
Sep 20, 2006 @ 05:17
Divine Drinks, Darling! ;-)
The text you are quoting:
Divine Drinks, Darling! ;-)
Stef__Granny, Sep 20, 2006 @ 05:17
Stef__Granny, Sep 20, 2006 @ 05:17
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 10
Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:31
For the same reason as me... to get up one rank on the list ! ;-P
On a more serious note, I was happy receiving some less expected than others invitations. Made me realise that, even if we might not see each other so often for various reasons, we both still felt related to each other.
I expressed my concern some time ago about this ranking becoming a competition. I know, Granny, it's not what you meant. But some members could go for quantity rather than quality, just to look cool, and that might be a shame.
Quoting myself:
"On this last point, sorting members by number of friends in their list, doesn't it look like a competition ? Are we working towards a MySpace popularity system ? Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ? Do we want to give implicit "first star" membership status to some, based on how many people they added ? Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected ?
For all that, I fear this two specifications could lead to many frustrations and disappointments. I'm sure we can handle the effects without necessarily changing the specs. But we should make sure there is no misunderstanding about what they should be, or not be. So, could we sum all that up with :
- GOL is not a dating site
- The most popular members are not necessarily the best ones
- Members with few friends are those who are most welcome on GOL, this site was made for them, chat with them !"
On a more serious note, I was happy receiving some less expected than others invitations. Made me realise that, even if we might not see each other so often for various reasons, we both still felt related to each other.
I expressed my concern some time ago about this ranking becoming a competition. I know, Granny, it's not what you meant. But some members could go for quantity rather than quality, just to look cool, and that might be a shame.
Quoting myself:
"On this last point, sorting members by number of friends in their list, doesn't it look like a competition ? Are we working towards a MySpace popularity system ? Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ? Do we want to give implicit "first star" membership status to some, based on how many people they added ? Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected ?
For all that, I fear this two specifications could lead to many frustrations and disappointments. I'm sure we can handle the effects without necessarily changing the specs. But we should make sure there is no misunderstanding about what they should be, or not be. So, could we sum all that up with :
- GOL is not a dating site
- The most popular members are not necessarily the best ones
- Members with few friends are those who are most welcome on GOL, this site was made for them, chat with them !"
The text you are quoting:
For the same reason as me... to get up one rank on the list ! ;-P
On a more serious note, I was happy receiving some less expected than others invitations. Made me realise that, even if we might not see each other so often for various reasons, we both still felt related to each other.
I expressed my concern some time ago about this ranking becoming a competition. I know, Granny, it's not what you meant. But some members could go for quantity rather than quality, just to look cool, and that might be a shame.
Quoting myself:
"On this last point, sorting members by number of friends in their list, doesn't it look like a competition ? Are we working towards a MySpace popularity system ? Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ? Do we want to give implicit "first star" membership status to some, based on how many people they added ? Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected ?
For all that, I fear this two specifications could lead to many frustrations and disappointments. I'm sure we can handle the effects without necessarily changing the specs. But we should make sure there is no misunderstanding about what they should be, or not be. So, could we sum all that up with :
- GOL is not a dating site
- The most popular members are not necessarily the best ones
- Members with few friends are those who are most welcome on GOL, this site was made for them, chat with them !"
Hobbes, Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:31
On a more serious note, I was happy receiving some less expected than others invitations. Made me realise that, even if we might not see each other so often for various reasons, we both still felt related to each other.
I expressed my concern some time ago about this ranking becoming a competition. I know, Granny, it's not what you meant. But some members could go for quantity rather than quality, just to look cool, and that might be a shame.
Quoting myself:
"On this last point, sorting members by number of friends in their list, doesn't it look like a competition ? Are we working towards a MySpace popularity system ? Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ? Do we want to give implicit "first star" membership status to some, based on how many people they added ? Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected ?
For all that, I fear this two specifications could lead to many frustrations and disappointments. I'm sure we can handle the effects without necessarily changing the specs. But we should make sure there is no misunderstanding about what they should be, or not be. So, could we sum all that up with :
- GOL is not a dating site
- The most popular members are not necessarily the best ones
- Members with few friends are those who are most welcome on GOL, this site was made for them, chat with them !"
Hobbes, Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:31
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 11
Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:58
Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected?
I don't see the point of ranking, but I don't see the harm either. I mean ... every ranking or non ranking system is good or bad based on how ppl use it. and ppl that thinks that having more friends is 'cooler' (besides me Mr_Sarks, and Granny joking about it) then having 0 will add 'random' friends anyway. Ranking or not, as they used to do before ...
Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ?
I never heard this complain from anyone ... (but you, and that was for a different reason I beleive). I am not trying to start a polemic discussion here, but let's face it. People meet on GOL, some like each other more or less better then others ... and .. they tend to stick togheter and going out togheter (look at you, Tinkie, Minda etc ... the impression I and some others get from your activity review is that you always hang out togheter and are a 'usual suspects' kind of group). That doesn't mean a group won't welcome new ppl, and based on the law of evolution and nature sub group will form ... closer friendships etc.
Isn;t that normal? Is not like we get any favour or privilege based on that ...
GOL is created for everyone, member with more and less friends. HOw many friends we have online is not an indicator of how many we have offline (I know quite a few ppl with 3 friends online that have loads of friends off line - even golers, and are part of a larger group that hang out togheter) ... but most probabily only of the time we spend logged on this site (if I am rarely online i have not much interest in adding ppl to my GOL friends list, i 'd rather get their phone numbers!) ....
Vale :) - with clearly way too much time spent online given the lenght of the post and the number of friends.
I don't see the point of ranking, but I don't see the harm either. I mean ... every ranking or non ranking system is good or bad based on how ppl use it. and ppl that thinks that having more friends is 'cooler' (besides me Mr_Sarks, and Granny joking about it) then having 0 will add 'random' friends anyway. Ranking or not, as they used to do before ...
Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ?
I never heard this complain from anyone ... (but you, and that was for a different reason I beleive). I am not trying to start a polemic discussion here, but let's face it. People meet on GOL, some like each other more or less better then others ... and .. they tend to stick togheter and going out togheter (look at you, Tinkie, Minda etc ... the impression I and some others get from your activity review is that you always hang out togheter and are a 'usual suspects' kind of group). That doesn't mean a group won't welcome new ppl, and based on the law of evolution and nature sub group will form ... closer friendships etc.
Isn;t that normal? Is not like we get any favour or privilege based on that ...
GOL is created for everyone, member with more and less friends. HOw many friends we have online is not an indicator of how many we have offline (I know quite a few ppl with 3 friends online that have loads of friends off line - even golers, and are part of a larger group that hang out togheter) ... but most probabily only of the time we spend logged on this site (if I am rarely online i have not much interest in adding ppl to my GOL friends list, i 'd rather get their phone numbers!) ....
Vale :) - with clearly way too much time spent online given the lenght of the post and the number of friends.
The text you are quoting:
Isn't Geneva life competitive enough on the business level to extend it to friendship management ? How will "0 friend" members feel like ? Encouraged to meet lots of people... or even more lonely, devaluated and rejected?
I don't see the point of ranking, but I don't see the harm either. I mean ... every ranking or non ranking system is good or bad based on how ppl use it. and ppl that thinks that having more friends is 'cooler' (besides me Mr_Sarks, and Granny joking about it) then having 0 will add 'random' friends anyway. Ranking or not, as they used to do before ...
Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ?
I never heard this complain from anyone ... (but you, and that was for a different reason I beleive). I am not trying to start a polemic discussion here, but let's face it. People meet on GOL, some like each other more or less better then others ... and .. they tend to stick togheter and going out togheter (look at you, Tinkie, Minda etc ... the impression I and some others get from your activity review is that you always hang out togheter and are a 'usual suspects' kind of group). That doesn't mean a group won't welcome new ppl, and based on the law of evolution and nature sub group will form ... closer friendships etc.
Isn;t that normal? Is not like we get any favour or privilege based on that ...
GOL is created for everyone, member with more and less friends. HOw many friends we have online is not an indicator of how many we have offline (I know quite a few ppl with 3 friends online that have loads of friends off line - even golers, and are part of a larger group that hang out togheter) ... but most probabily only of the time we spend logged on this site (if I am rarely online i have not much interest in adding ppl to my GOL friends list, i 'd rather get their phone numbers!) ....
Vale :) - with clearly way too much time spent online given the lenght of the post and the number of friends.
Hoiling, Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:58
I don't see the point of ranking, but I don't see the harm either. I mean ... every ranking or non ranking system is good or bad based on how ppl use it. and ppl that thinks that having more friends is 'cooler' (besides me Mr_Sarks, and Granny joking about it) then having 0 will add 'random' friends anyway. Ranking or not, as they used to do before ...
Didn't many members already complain about GOL having too many cliques and elitism ?
I never heard this complain from anyone ... (but you, and that was for a different reason I beleive). I am not trying to start a polemic discussion here, but let's face it. People meet on GOL, some like each other more or less better then others ... and .. they tend to stick togheter and going out togheter (look at you, Tinkie, Minda etc ... the impression I and some others get from your activity review is that you always hang out togheter and are a 'usual suspects' kind of group). That doesn't mean a group won't welcome new ppl, and based on the law of evolution and nature sub group will form ... closer friendships etc.
Isn;t that normal? Is not like we get any favour or privilege based on that ...
GOL is created for everyone, member with more and less friends. HOw many friends we have online is not an indicator of how many we have offline (I know quite a few ppl with 3 friends online that have loads of friends off line - even golers, and are part of a larger group that hang out togheter) ... but most probabily only of the time we spend logged on this site (if I am rarely online i have not much interest in adding ppl to my GOL friends list, i 'd rather get their phone numbers!) ....
Vale :) - with clearly way too much time spent online given the lenght of the post and the number of friends.
Hoiling, Sep 20, 2006 @ 12:58
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 12
Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:05
and people who are certainly more popular than I am (Nir and Iolly as a first example) have less friends in the network, today. I guess it's 'cause they had less time to accept invitations...
I'm not the "winner" anymore already!
And loads of people with "0 friends" have my invitation pending in their inboxes. So it doesn't mean anything.
It's not a race, but I liked to play with it.
An excuse as any other to tell you: "I love you, friends!"
:-P (I'm becoming dam' cheesy, here! Am I?)
I'm not the "winner" anymore already!
And loads of people with "0 friends" have my invitation pending in their inboxes. So it doesn't mean anything.
It's not a race, but I liked to play with it.
An excuse as any other to tell you: "I love you, friends!"
:-P (I'm becoming dam' cheesy, here! Am I?)
The text you are quoting:
and people who are certainly more popular than I am (Nir and Iolly as a first example) have less friends in the network, today. I guess it's 'cause they had less time to accept invitations...
I'm not the "winner" anymore already!
And loads of people with "0 friends" have my invitation pending in their inboxes. So it doesn't mean anything.
It's not a race, but I liked to play with it.
An excuse as any other to tell you: "I love you, friends!"
:-P (I'm becoming dam' cheesy, here! Am I?)
Stef__Granny, Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:05
I'm not the "winner" anymore already!
And loads of people with "0 friends" have my invitation pending in their inboxes. So it doesn't mean anything.
It's not a race, but I liked to play with it.
An excuse as any other to tell you: "I love you, friends!"
:-P (I'm becoming dam' cheesy, here! Am I?)
Stef__Granny, Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:05
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 13
Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:22
"An excuse as any other to tell you: 'I love you, friends!'" is really sweat ! I sign for that... Granny for President ! (once again!)
The text you are quoting:
"An excuse as any other to tell you: 'I love you, friends!'" is really sweat ! I sign for that... Granny for President ! (once again!)
Hobbes, Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:22
Hobbes, Sep 20, 2006 @ 14:22
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 14
Sep 20, 2006 @ 15:31
I love you friends ... and ... friends in the waiting list :)
(so the ones that are not in the friends list don't feel excluded)
and will love all the new ones.
Cheesy Vale - bored while pc is doing windows updates.
(so the ones that are not in the friends list don't feel excluded)
and will love all the new ones.
Cheesy Vale - bored while pc is doing windows updates.
The text you are quoting:
I love you friends ... and ... friends in the waiting list :)
(so the ones that are not in the friends list don't feel excluded)
and will love all the new ones.
Cheesy Vale - bored while pc is doing windows updates.
Hoiling, Sep 20, 2006 @ 15:31
(so the ones that are not in the friends list don't feel excluded)
and will love all the new ones.
Cheesy Vale - bored while pc is doing windows updates.
Hoiling, Sep 20, 2006 @ 15:31
Your Reply:
Only members can see names and photos
Re: I feel good. Thanks
Post 15
Sep 22, 2006 @ 12:39
So, either I became suddenly a nicer person, or... I just didn't know I had so many friends before ! ;-)
The text you are quoting:
So, either I became suddenly a nicer person, or... I just didn't know I had so many friends before ! ;-)
Hobbes, Sep 22, 2006 @ 12:39
Hobbes, Sep 22, 2006 @ 12:39
Your Reply:
