[coldtea]

>For most of the posts users would make, users would probably spend more time thinking about which circles to enable than actually writing the post. It's a headache and it leads to a poor experience, it feels like a hurdle, something you must do; it makes posting less natural.

How low have we got, capacity wise, when this is even considered "a hurdle"?

At one time, people had to walk to the TV to change the channels...

And before that, they had to have candles and be good with finger shadows to entertain themselves...

[frereubu]

It's because it forces you to pick. Outside of the discrete friendship groups online, there's an ever-shifting on-the-spot calculation about who's around you and how much you want to say. One day you might feel like telling friend X while you're in the coffee shop together with just one other friend, the next day you might not feel so open in the bar for a variety of reasons. Add in all the variables about who else is around, how much beer you've drunk, whether you've just been paid, if the relationship with a partner is going well etc. and every situation is different in a very nuanced way. I'm not on Facebook now, but when I was I rapidly gave up on the idea of administering my friendship groups because it felt like I was bureacratising my friendships in a very unnatural way.

[Already__Taken]

One person is all it takes to ruin it, and there's no cost for them to do so nor immediate negative consequence.

I thought g+ circles was a great idea, the reddit webdesign circle taught me I don't care about all of your kids.