Followers Are Superior To Friends

[Jυra]

People use to use friend 'n follow people so they know when someone they find interesting was online with + by users names on online lists, etc. Almost nobody on forums are friends and the few people on a forum someone may see as a friend doesn't need a friend feature to know they're friends. The whole nonsense about not liking a word because one of its several meanings means follow as in opposite of leader is silly. Spamming friend requests is just as lame as liking every bit of content that has a like button. 

I don't use the feature as friends on forums I visit because I'm not friends with most people. I'd rather follow someone if I'm interested in their content than give a false notion that I like them. Having it as friends just is serves a tiny nearly non-existent amount of users that use forums (as in someone may want to follow many but may only be friends with 0-5 users).

[Woodsman]

So followers are more important to you than friends. That's OK. Your life your way. It does not matter to me one way or the other after all I am not the one paying your dues. But when it comes to me I pay my own dues and won't expect to find anyone following me. Again no big deal. I just happen to be one of the many that won't follow so you will never have to worry about seeing me in your shadow. Actually I am looking for a fix to my own situation and when I find it I will be fine with it also... I already know how to remove the followers crap from the theme templates but that does not really fix anything does it? I will be feeling awesome when I find it in core and remove it without destroying the rest... Followers are fine for the puppies. But then I would I know we have had many. I am a man following the beat of my own drum and don't expect much from others. Friends I made here in the last 10 years are just that friends and some damn good ones... Something apparently you don't know anything about being as you said you don't need them. You want to be a follower that's up to you but please don't be so pompous to expect others to do the same. Facebook was a good example... There was a point I had well over 1000 so called friends in reality followers becaues they were friends of friends of friends.... I removed all but the people I actually have known for many of years and trust. And it so happens I don't even go there anymore so I suppose removing 700+ people didn't matter to me either.

[SJ77]

So followers are more important to you than friends........ That's OK. Your life your way.... you will never have to worry about seeing me in your shadow........ Followers are fine for the puppies........ I am a man following the beat of my own drum........ You want to be a follower that's up to you.......

​SERIOUSLY ??? The philosophy again?? Dude, get over it.  It's not about any kind of philosophical meaning in any way. It's about finding content on a forum. @Jura makes a great point. The follower system is a better way to find content than the friend system. Don't get so hung up on semantics and try to think about PROCESS! Which PROCESS makes more sense for easily finding content that you are interested in? Who cares what it's called.

[SJ77]

As a side note why does my "Jura" mention lead to someone's profile other than Jura? Is this a bug?

[Charles]

So followers are more important to you than friends. That's OK. Your life your way. It does not matter to me one way or the other after all I am not the one paying your dues. But when it comes to me I pay my own dues and won't expect to find anyone following me. Again no big deal. I just happen to be one of the many that won't follow so you will never have to worry about seeing me in your shadow. Actually I am looking for a fix to my own situation and when I find it I will be fine with it also... I already know how to remove the followers crap from the theme templates but that does not really fix anything does it? I will be feeling awesome when I find it in core and remove it without destroying the rest... Followers are fine for the puppies. But then I would I know we have had many. I am a man following the beat of my own drum and don't expect much from others. Friends I made here in the last 10 years are just that friends and some damn good ones... Something apparently you don't know anything about being as you said you don't need them. You want to be a follower that's up to you but please don't be so pompous to expect others to do the same. Facebook was a good example... There was a point I had well over 1000 so called friends in reality followers becaues they were friends of friends of friends.... I removed all but the people I actually have known for many of years and trust. And it so happens I don't even go there anymore so I suppose removing 700+ people didn't matter to me either.

​I think that, just maybe, you're putting way too much thought into the word "follow" here. In this case it's follow as in "watch" not follow as in "bow before in servitude."

[Meddysong]

As a side note why does my "Jura" mention lead to someone's profile other than Jura? Is this a bug?

​I thought it was a bug because there's another user with the display name jura who appears, whereas Jura doesn't. But looking more deeply into it reveals the problem; the second letter of Jura's name isn't

u but υ.

The downside is that even with pasting that letter in Jura still doesn't appear. Instead it assumes that the r is the first letter.

[Woodsman]

​I think that, just maybe, you're putting way too much thought into the word "follow" here. In this case it's follow as in "watch" not follow as in "bow before in servitude."

​In any other case Charles I could agree as in following a topic, a question, or even a comment and event. To make it short those that like to be followers is fine. Just don't pull me into it because thats what others are doing.

Someday we may have this discussion in private and though you may not quite understand how such a meaningless word can eat me so. You will come to understand the why.

BTW I cut 10 lines from between the 2...

[Lindy]

It's been said before but warrants a repeat: "Friends" served no meaningful purpose other than an arbitrary list. Based on our own observations and interaction with clients on all levels, it's far more common to find yourself in a situation where you may not be particularly interested in being "friends" with someone from a social aspect, but you find their content interesting so you may want to follow (keep track of) their content. Even in case where you have made friends through the community, you may want to follow their content - I'm unsure of the hangup on the "friends" especially as it relates to IPS software as again, it did nothing. 

If Facebook is on the brain, I can understand the "friends" perspective, but remember, Facebook friend content is a private medium. Content is meant to be private and limited to your friends network. That's quite different than the typical community On Facebook public pages (or even members you aren't friends with), Twitter and most other public mediums - you "follow" (or "like") the member to keep track of their content... not because you necessarily think they're groovy and consider them intellectually superior to yourself, but because you're interested in their content.  

There's nothing to say if compelling feedback with sound reasoning is provided, we won't consider an actual "friends" feature in the future -- but ask yourself what you're really after. Many community admins aren't keen on the idea of footing the bill for their members to create private personal content only to be shared with a limited group of friends that willfully excludes the majority of the community. So beyond private content limited to friends only, what would you envision a "friends" feature doing that following can't accomplish? Is it more of a concern that you don't have control over who follows you? If so, I would argue that you're on a public community -- everything you're posting is viewable to the person that follows you with or without the ability to make it easy for people who find your content interesting and enjoy your contributions. The follow system isn't some mystical feature that exposes your social security number and a live video feed into your home nor is it an indication of worship to the individual you're following - it's merely a shortcut to content that's already public.

All of that said, we've had internal discussion on the follow system and generally agree it needs more flexibility and control. While the scope of that deems it inappropriate for changes this late in the game (before final) - we're considering it a top priority to isolate member content notifications from non-member content notifications and giving you a bit more control.

[Woodsman]

It's been said before but warrants a repeat: "Friends" served no meaningful purpose other than an arbitrary list. Based on our own observations and interaction with clients on all levels, it's far more common to find yourself in a situation where you may not be particularly interested in being "friends" with someone from a social aspect, but you find their content interesting so you may want to follow (keep track of) their content. Even in case where you have made friends through the community, you may want to follow their content - I'm unsure of the hangup on the "friends" especially as it relates to IPS software as again, it did nothing.

If Facebook is on the brain, I can understand the "friends" perspective, but remember, Facebook friend content is a private medium. Content is meant to be private and limited to your friends network. That's quite different than the typical community On Facebook public pages (or even members you aren't friends with), Twitter and most other public mediums - you "follow" (or "like") the member to keep track of their content... not because you necessarily think they're groovy and consider them intellectually superior to yourself, but because you're interested in their content.  

There's nothing to say if compelling feedback with sound reasoning is provided, we won't consider an actual "friends" feature in the future -- but ask yourself what you're really after. Many community admins aren't keen on the idea of footing the bill for their members to create private personal content only to be shared with a limited group of friends that willfully excludes the majority of the community. So beyond private content limited to friends only, what would you envision a "friends" feature doing that following can't accomplish? Is it more of a concern that you don't have control over who follows you? If so, I would argue that you're on a public community -- everything you're posting is viewable to the person that follows you with or without the ability to make it easy for people who find your content interesting and enjoy your contributions. The follow system isn't some mystical feature that exposes your social security number and a live video feed into your home nor is it an indication of worship to the individual you're following - it's merely a shortcut to content that's already public.

All of that said, we've had internal discussion on the follow system and generally agree it needs more flexibility and control. While the scope of that deems it inappropriate for changes this late in the game (before final) - we're considering it a top priority to isolate member content notifications from non-member content notifications and giving you a bit more control.

​"Friends" served no meaningful purpose other than an arbitrary list. By who's set of standards?

but you find their content interesting so you may want to follow (keep track of) their content. This is what the "Follow This" button is for. Not the Followers in the profile So I have to disagree.

Even in case where you have made friends through the community, you may want to follow their content - I'm unsure of the hangup on the "friends" especially as it relates to IPS software as again, it did nothing.  Again by who's standards? Was there ever a poll taken? If so I must have been off fishing with friends and missed that one.

If Facebook is on the brain, I can understand the "friends" perspective, but remember, Facebook friend content is a private medium. Content is meant to be private and limited to your friends network. If this were true then I would have not had the need to remove 700 plus friends of friends of friends even though my settings were set to friends only.

Twitter and most other public mediums - you "follow" (or "like") the member to keep track of their content... not because you necessarily think they're groovy and consider them intellectually superior to yourself, but because you're interested in their content.   I wish this was true then I would not have to empty the spam folder so often. I am constantly getting junk mail from people I have no clue on who they are and only 2 people (musicians) I actually follow (Damn I hate that word).

There's nothing to say if compelling feedback with sound reasoning is provided, we won't consider an actual "friends" feature in the future -- but ask yourself what you're really after. Many community admins aren't keen on the idea of footing the bill for their members to create private personal content only to be shared with a limited group of friends that willfully excludes the majority of the community. So beyond private content limited to friends only, what would you envision a "friends" feature doing that following can't accomplish? Is it more of a concern that you don't have control over who follows you? If so, I would argue that you're on a public community -- everything you're posting is viewable to the person that follows you with or without the ability to make it easy for people who find your content interesting and enjoy your contributions. The follow system isn't some mystical feature that exposes your social security number and a live video feed into your home nor is it an indication of worship to the individual you're following - it's merely a shortcut to content that's already public.   Again this is what the "Like This" button is for. Though I agree to a point that if those that want totally private conversations would best to use snail-mail instead.

All of that said, we've had internal discussion on the follow system and generally agree it needs more flexibility and control. While the scope of that deems it inappropriate for changes this late in the game (before final) - we're considering it a top priority to isolate member content notifications from non-member content notifications and giving you a bit more control.  Again this was brought up in the preview stage and the answer was "The new Followers system will be much better" Well sorry to say like a thunder storm it got worse rather than better. Or is it the aftermath that we need to wait for?

The friends I made here had to be removed as followers due to the spam. (Nothing personal)

Again I don't have an issue for those who wish to follow. I really don't. But I do have an issue with it shoved down my throat telling me I have to like it because others say so.

Just tell me where in Core where to remove the Followers from the profile and I will do it.... NO! changing the language string does not cut it... The socialistic function is still there. and removing it at skin theme level won't do it because of those who may like it won't purchase my themes.

If it were up to me and obviously its Not. I'd remove both Friends and Followers from the profile if I had to make a choice over those I wish not to follow. Again totally separate from the "Follow This" button.

[opentype]

The socialistic function is still there.

​Ha!  Finally you are admitting that you see view this purely technical functionality from an ideological point of view. 

[SJ77]

@Lindy  I wish I could hit the like button 50 times. Excellent response, with sound reasoning. I am so happy you're on the IPB team. Thank you. With regard to answering your questions about friends. I have been in favor of a friend system because there are some users I don't want to follow but I would like to have them in a personal list on my profile. Friends for me is like an interesting user bookmark. Why bookmark it if I don't want to see their content on a regular basis? Well exactly for that reason. Some members I want to bookmark and check up on occasionally but I don't wish to be bombarded by notifications. Others I would genuinely like to follow and receive regular updates. I think it's an important distinction. The more I think of it though, I am coming to realize that this is not very use. Additionally, I am starting to think however that Followers with the right options and permissions can accomplish everything I need in one integrated system. I will stay tuned. Thanks again.

​"Friends" served no meaningful purpose other than an arbitrary list. "By who's set of standards?

​You ask a question but haven't provided any evidence that a friends list is anything but an arbitrary list. What does a friends list do? The only reason I can think of for having a big list of friends is to be able to reference their profile on occasion but I would much rather keep track of their contributions (and be notified when one is made) as opposed to hunting down their profile on a whim.

​I'm unsure of the hangup on the "friends" especially as it relates to IPS software as again, it did nothing.  Again by who's standards? Was there ever a poll taken?

​WHAT? If there is a disagreement here, let's hear it. You don't agree that it did nothing, then please state what it did. How on earth would a poll help? IPB team needs to make a good product not win a high school popularity contest.

​If Facebook is on the brain, I can understand the "friends" perspective, but remember, Facebook friend content is a private medium. Content is meant to be private and limited to your friends network. If this were true then I would have not had the need to remove 700 plus friends of friends of friends even though my settings were set to friends only.

​Sounds like something you should take up with Facebook. However, Facebook's failure here is immaterial. Lindy's point remains strong. There is a fundamental difference between Facebook and a privately held and operated forum community.

​Twitter and most other public mediums - you "follow" (or "like") the member to keep track of their content... not because you necessarily think they're groovy and consider them intellectually superior to yourself, but because you're interested in their content.   I wish this was true then I would not have to empty the spam folder so often. I am constantly getting junk mail from people I have no clue on who they are and only 2 people (musicians) I actually follow (Damn I hate that word).

​Again, IPB has already stated that the follow system will need some improvement. Because it's not perfect now doesn't mean it should go away. We need to keep our eye on the intended purpose and the potential for user benefit. We can always address the issues as they show up. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water here. As far as hating the word "follower", I am not sure this is the right venue for discussing a physiological objection to something. We don't need to know if a word makes you feel vile or warm and fuzzy. We want to focus on function. "Follower" in this sense has nothing to do with not "marching to the beat of your own drum". It's completely about flagging content that we want to raise to top level awareness. I am sure it would be the "Keep track of content posted by this user" button if that weren't so pedantic.

​

Just tell me where in Core where to remove the Followers from the profile and I will do it.... NO! changing the language string does not cut it... The socialistic function is still there. and removing it at skin theme level won't do it because of those who may like it won't purchase my themes.

If it were up to me and obviously its Not. I'd remove both Friends and Followers from the profile if I had to make a choice over those I wish not to follow. Again totally separate from the "Follow This" button.

​So if you don't want either of these shouldn't your whole angle be about the ability to remove this function with an optional switch in the ACP?  I happen to agree with that angle if you would make it. Being able to turn things off would be a nice feature.

 

 

[esquire]

It's been said before but warrants a repeat: "Friends" served no meaningful purpose other than an arbitrary list. Based on our own observations and interaction with clients on all levels, it's.... - I'm unsure of the hangup on the "friends" especially as it relates to IPS software as again, it did nothing. 

Perhaps no meaningful purpose to IPS and the very small group involved. But users love it on many communities I've run, even if it acts as just a familiar security blanket that makes them feel loved. But moreso, this "arbitrary" list reflects users' own personal choices of whom they trust -- specific data which community owners and plugin developers can leverage by developing their own solutions around it, even if some don't appreciate the bigger picture. Now that community-specific data is wiped out in IPS 4.

If Facebook is on the brain, I can understand the "friends" perspective, but remember, Facebook friend content is a private medium. Content is meant to be private and limited to your friends network. That's quite different than the typical community ....Many community admins aren't keen on the idea of footing the bill for their members to create private personal content only to be shared with a limited group of friends that willfully excludes the majority of the community.

​I don't know what is the "typical community" without a niche. The Xbox community is quite different than the History community which is very different from the Nightlife community. The answer for community admins who aren't keen on footing the bill for private content essential to running certain communities (such as nightlife) is to (a) sell memberships and/or collect donations using the Commerce module; and/or (b) limit the amount of content that users can share using groups; and/or (c) disallow private content sharing. People come to privately owned communities which they believe are run by like minded people and who fill a desire/need in the market. It may resemble Facebook but it is clearly not Facebook, a public company which many recognize exists to make money by selling user data which is a concern. (PS - considering that Gallery is wedging the "private permissions group" feature back in, this seems to foster the private content notion that was removed for the reasons just stated. Confusing. And I don't understand why it wasn't easier to just have "Friends" be that group, removing the need to explain to users some convoluted system.)

On Facebook public pages (or even members you aren't friends with), Twitter and most other public mediums - you "follow" (or "like") the member to keep track of their content... not because you necessarily think they're groovy and consider them intellectually superior to yourself, but because you're interested in their content.  The follow system isn't some mystical feature that exposes your social security number and a live video feed into your home nor is it an indication of worship to the individual you're following - it's merely a shortcut to content that's already public. ......  All of that said, we've had internal discussion on the follow system and generally agree it needs more flexibility and control. While the scope of that deems it inappropriate for changes this late in the game (before final) - we're considering it a top priority to isolate member content notifications from non-member content notifications and giving you a bit more control.

Twitter is microblogging. It is an entirely different concept than forums, a very critical distinction. What does "to keep track of their content" actually mean on a forum - track the dozens of mundane posts that can be made every day? Follow serves as a bookmark for interesting members - just like you said - that's it. Without powerful tools, the notification system is just a huge unsorted obtrusive haystack that is an activity stream filtered by members. Given the choice, I'd much rather have the upsell of providing semi-private/private content through memberships than a bookmark which could have been developed as a plugin. I won't elaborate on models where notification is useful but I'd wager it won't be on a majority of IPS-type communities.

The bottom line to me is that IPS 4 deletes all Friends/user defined trust relationships - so IPS 3 owners are faced with a critical choice. There is no commitment to the Friends function, which may result in few private/semi-private and social networking type plugins, which typically leverage this concept - which is not the direction IPS wants to take the software. IMHO, IPS 4 seems much less flexible than IPS 3. While I may not agree with all these decisions, I respect them. And I truly appreciate you sharing the company's unabridged thoughts on IPS 4 since it now allows me to set expectations as to the direction of IPS 4.

[Jυra]

So followers are more important to you than friends.

​Nothing at all that I've said can lead anyone to the conclusion I value people I follow for content over friends. It's a bit mean to suggest that I do.

[Izaya Orihara]

So is this argument over the word "follower" because if so, that really is the most trivial thing I've seen yet.

[SJ77]

So is this argument over the word "follower" because if so, that really is the most trivial thing I've seen yet.

​it seems to be yes.

[Izaya Orihara]

​it seems to be yes.

​I was really hoping you'd tell me I was obviously mistaken.

Can't we change the word Follower to something else though? Like on this IPB4 forum for Adventure time(A cartoon), they call their like system "Brofist" which I guess is some reference to the show(Idk, don't watch it regularly). So can't we do the same thing for the 'term' followers?

In theory I can understand the OP's ideology with the word follower but then realistically speaking I realize that followers are essentially saying you are subscribing to that the user.

[Hexsplosions]

If I want an inflated friends list I can go on Facebook.

the friends feature in IP.Board always struck me as a little pointless. It didn't really do anything beyond letting me follow their content or bulking up a pointless list in my profile. My friends know they are my friends and they don't need to be on a list to know that.

Can somebody point out why a friends list is better than a followers list without philosophical nonsense being attached?

[Izaya Orihara]

If I want an inflated friends list I can go on Facebook.

the friends feature in IP.Board always struck me as a little pointless. It didn't really do anything beyond letting me follow their content or bulking up a pointless list in my profile. My friends know they are my friends and they don't need to be on a list to know that.

Can somebody point out why a friends list is better than a followers list without philosophical nonsense being attached?

​Definite agreement here with you!

‌@esquire ,to my surprise, makes some valid points but then at the same time it makes me wonder is this a minority complaint or something that majorly affects a lot of users. If we're going off the samples of people in this debate, it seems most people are hung up on this philosophical concept of a friend's list. It reminds me of facebook when I was in middle school and we used to argue over the top friend's list and being number 1. It seems this whole concept of a friend's list is superficial

More importantly, I think if IPS properly implements features to allow you the ability to chose what you want to be notified of from those you follow it would lessen these complaints and of course by doing that, you can also choose to not subscribe/be notified of anything of that user and just follow them. Which then will make it exactly the same way the current friend system works presently.

 

[Jaymez]

holy bro...maybe you IPS gurus go document that Pages app with all this energy.

[opentype]

@esquire ,to my surprise, makes some valid points but then at the same time it makes me wonder is this a minority complaint or something that majorly affects a lot of users. If we're going off the samples of people in this debate, it seems most people are hung up on this philosophical concept of a friend's list. 

​No, that philosophical thing is a minority opinion. The other admins (and more than IPS had expected I guess) just argue that their users have used and liked this functionality even if it didn’t do much more than being a list on the profile page. And no one likes to get stuff taken away. ;-)

Lindy’s answer sounded pretty clear on what will happen: better follower options, but (probably) no return of the friend feature. 

Maybe a developer will just take the chance and offer it as plugin. Since the feature didn’t do very much, it is probably rather easy to recreate. 

[esquire]

 

‌@esquire ,to my surprise, makes some valid points but then at the same time it makes me wonder is this a minority complaint or something that majorly affects a lot of users. If we're going off the samples of people in this debate, it seems most people are hung up on this philosophical concept of a friend's list. It reminds me of facebook when I was in middle school and we used to argue over the top friend's list and being number 1. It seems this whole concept of a friend's list is superficial the chance and offer it as plugin. Since the feature didn’t do very much, it is probably rather easy to recreate. 

​We'll certainly find out how much of a "minority complaint" removing the Friends list is after IPS 4 is released. Then people will understand. Considering how many still don't seem to understand the difference between the two and how they work, it would seem many still don't grasp how it works. In the simplest terms, Friends always requires dual consent - User A makes request, User B agrees both trust each other. User A posts an image, B can see it because of the Friendship link. Follow does not require dual consent. You can subscribe to any public content you want without the content creator approving your wish to, e.g. subscribe to this thread, blog posts, whatever. 

If I want an inflated friends list I can go on Facebook.

the friends feature in IP.Board always struck me as a little pointless. It didn't really do anything beyond letting me follow their content or bulking up a pointless list in my profile. My friends know they are my friends and they don't need to be on a list to know that.

Can somebody point out why a friends list is better than a followers list without philosophical nonsense being attached?

I run professional and social communities. The professional group wants to see "friend" relationships so that they can approach others in the same way you'd use LinkedIn or to share private "tips" on getting leads or business info they don't want the general public or search engines to see, etc. Social and Dating sites: There are public image galleries and private albums. People don't want to have their sexy photos on a beach in a search engine or seen by everyone. Same goes photos that may contain children (educational and parenting sites), recreational drug use, adult fetishes, whatever. If private albums in galleries wasn't important, it begs the question why IPS is talking about enhancing a private permissions group back into the Gallery. Friends = one click private permissions group every user understands that covers ALL content in the suite with no need to explain to your users.

​No, that philosophical thing is a minority opinion. The other admins (and more than IPS had expected I guess) just argue that their users have used and liked this functionality even if it didn’t do much more than being a list on the profile page. And no one likes to get stuff taken away. ;-)

Lindy’s answer sounded pretty clear on what will happen: better follower options, but (probably) no return of the friend feature. 

Maybe a developer will just take the chance and offer it as plugin. Since the feature didn’t do very much, it is probably rather easy to recreate. 

We actually do agree for the most part. ​Seems like Friends is probably not happening in the core, which I think it must right now or it will never happen.

1. Critical functionality such as permissions groups need to be in the core. If not, IPS apps and other addons that should make use of friends will not be designed to work with functionality that doesn't exist, and not in the near future. It's complicated to reproduce too. Every IPS and addon update would potentially break the Friends plugin, which is too critical for a community-wide fail. And imagine the hassle to support the plugin trying to wedge it into IPS even later in the game. Private solution, if at all.

2. Nobody who has a friends site can upgrade to IPS 4 without putting their site back to zero. Do you think your community will spend time trying to make requests of every member they had a friends relationship with later? They will probably get angry that you wasted their time in the first place.

This is an answer I was waiting for and one of the features that differentiated IPS as a solution from other software that allows users to throw content up against a wall. Most of all, I wanted and expected to build upon that functionality among other things I've mentioned while here that I'm having challenges getting to work for my interests. If this changes, hoping someone will give me a holla but seems like it's full speed ahead as is. I'm unsubscribing, unfollowing, unnotifying myself here.  Good luck to you all, friends and followers.  

[opentype]

What that plugin would do, would depend on what you guys need it to do. If it’s mostly about accepting/requesting/displaying friendships it should be rather easy, because that can basically run on its own. If would only get more complicated if you would want it to be a foundation of other functionalities like friend-only albums/topics/database records and things like that. 

I also don’t think it needs to happen instantly. As far as I understand it, an existing friendship is turned into two people being mutual followers. You can just reverse that again to a friendship or create a button or email to accept that friendship again. You don’t have to start all over again. 

 

[Woodsman]

If I want an inflated friends list I can go on Facebook.

the friends feature in IP.Board always struck me as a little pointless. It didn't really do anything beyond letting me follow their content or bulking up a pointless list in my profile. My friends know they are my friends and they don't need to be on a list to know that.

Can somebody point out why a friends list is better than a followers list without philosophical nonsense being attached?

​The friend system when set up correctly didn't allow for just following others content only. I myself turned off quite a few of the features that did not apply or less important to my use. Members for example was a bloated tab that I didn't find very useful where others did and do to this day. IPS did remove it which was a good thing for some but yet there are those who still have a need due to the theme of their boards which is understandable. Whereas Friends in the way I used it was a perfect quick reference contact list system. Since I first got into the forum scene I have made many friends where yes this system kept us in the loop on other functions other than forums... There have been a few times a few of us got together fishing, hunting as well as family outings. A short list in comparison to a members. Friends a simple system used instead for a contact system is / was a simple tool to cut the fat. Then there is the word followers that I despise to no end for reasons I don't need bring here.

So from here to answer your question... Which is most is better than the other? That will depend on those using the term or system and also for what purpose. Just like members.

 

 

[Woodsman]

             9 hours ago, Woodsman said:

The socialistic function is still there.

​Ha!  Finally you are admitting that you see view this purely technical functionality from an ideological point of view.

​If you have a need to quote me use the complete statement please.

Just tell me where in Core where to remove the Followers from the profile and I will do it.... NO! changing the language string does not cut it... The socialistic function is still there. and removing it at skin theme level won't do it because of those who may like it won't purchase my themes.

The only thing I admit to is my hatred for a word and the spam it has brought.

[Woodsman]

​Nothing at all that I've said can lead anyone to the conclusion I value people I follow for content over friends. It's a bit mean to suggest that I do.

​OK then I have no cause to be offended.

People use to use friend 'n follow people so they know when someone they find interesting was online with + by users names on online lists, etc. Almost nobody on forums are friends and the few people on a forum someone may see as a friend doesn't need a friend feature to know they're friends. The whole nonsense about not liking a word because one of its several meanings means follow as in opposite of leader is silly. Spamming friend requests is just as lame as liking every bit of content that has a like button.

I don't use the feature as friends on forums I visit because I'm not friends with most people. I'd rather follow someone if I'm interested in their content than give a false notion that I like them. Having it as friends just is serves a tiny nearly non-existent amount of users that use forums (as in someone may want to follow many but may only be friends with 0-5 users).

​Funny I am the only one who has made it known of my feelings for the word. And again I will not discuss that here though there are a few people (friends) here as IPS Clients and members that know my reasons. But if you really must know find and ask them.

As I will say again if you prefer the word follower so be it. Its no sweat off my back. But like so many others before you don't try and shove it down my throat I won't swollow.