[meterplech]

This seems like it would be a bad thing for 1000memories. They need to show why they are a better platform for memories than Facebook. I can definitely see advantages to them- seems a bit classier to me at least. But why they are better than Facebook for this purpose should probably be the focal point of their marketing.

[rudyadler]

I'm a co-founder of 1000memories. One of the motivations for starting the site was a bad personal experience on Facebook after losing a friend. My friend's page got memorialized after a week, and all of his wall content was hidden. In response, three group pages were then created, and the experience became fragmented and disjointed.

I don't think of using FB as a memorial as necessarily bad or good; the truth it's somewhere in between and varies by individual. The problem for FB stems from the fact that it was never designed for this behavior. A vast majority of deaths on FB are never reported, and those profiles stay in the viral loop. Those that are reported put FB in the awkward position of being referee of the deceased's identity.

Ultimately, I was dissatisfied with allowing FB determine how we, as friends and family, were going to remember my friend's life. I don't like that his jokey profile photo is now stuck there forever. I think we can do better. But beyond FB, the reason I'm excited about building a platform for memories is that the Internet in general does a bad job speaking in the past tense. We are focused on providing tools to help people tell and preserve the stories of their loved one's lives.

[cormiston]

Rudy,

I think what your team is doing is very noble. You are absolutely correct, Facebook was not tailored to this kind of activity. We need a real platform to memorialize others and - more importantly to the average user - a place where we can memorialize OURSELVES. Mortality is a big issue and we all want to be preserved for eternity in a positive light. Facebook does not give us control over this postmortem public image.

As others have pointed out, 1000memories sits outside of mainstream networks. It asks users to go out of their way to memorialize and interact with the deceased on a platform beyond their daily traffic. Perhaps not a barrier to entry issue, my guess is that 1000memories has a retention issue. How do you keep people coming back after their first visit?

Is there a way 1000memories could better tie in social media and their networks? An obviously example would be to pull a user's Twitter feed into the mix of memories. Family and friends could rank the most memorable tweets and promote certain aspects of the deceased's published life. The same concept applies to blogs, Flickr photos, and Facebook updates.

To win social media integration, the deceased party would need to give 1000memories permission to connect with social media accounts pre-passing and regulate the content that can be shared. 1000memories could market to the living to set up an account that "gives you control of the memories you leave behind." A "will" for postmortem digital image.

I would use a service that offered me the ability to control my image postmortem.

[rudyadler]

Agreed, it gets really interesting when we bring it around to ourselves. It's difficult to import digital property without expressed permission, but I think the space will evolve a lot over the next few years and create a lot of opportunities for story-telling and narrative.

[meterplech]

Interesting. I like your description of this. I specifically think that a problem with Facebook for this is the jokes that are still there. That is another good point. I hope the press for you guys talks about the advantages of Facebook.

[rglover]

I had never heard of 1000memories until now, but I think you make a good point about their strategy. Their service requires you to physically create a memorial where as Facebook inadvertently just gives it to you. Not to mention it's already tied into your (seemingly) primary social network.

[cormiston]

Automation in a service like this is key because, well, you're dead and you can't do anything about it.

Facebook should consider features the user can control that take effect upon death. A user would have to have a certain level of foresight about their mortality, but i think that could have a very positive effect.

[ultrasaurus]

Could it be as simple as denoting a Facebook next-of-kin?

[cormiston]

Sounds like a plan to me!

[resdirector]

Agreed.

Having seen some of my friends successfully and easily set up memory pages on Facebook, makes me more inclined to choose Facebook (which I know and (somewhat) trust) over 1000memories. In other words, the exposure that Facebook has (or will have when memory pages become more widespread) is far greater than 1000memories due to their pre-existing social network.