[fudged]

To many people, Facebook is the default communication channel. To delete your Facebook account is like to be offered a free iphone + unlimited contract and refuse it; the idea of removing your name from the social phonebook is beyond the comprehension of many people.

And subconsciously, you're removing value from other people's valued medium/experience. By not having account, you must have some opposition to something that they have, use, and like; I think it might be subconsciously insulting and snobby to many people. To most people, the service holds unquestionable value.

(These generalizations may or may not be true... merely speculation/extrapolation from my own experiences)

[michaelbuckbee]

I think you're correct. I have an elderly relative that has recently turned to using FB on the iPad as her prime means of communicating with her relatives in the Phillipines (while she is in the US).

It's gotten to the point where she just _can't_ understand why people aren't on Facebook. "Why aren't they there? Don't they want to hear from me? What's wrong with them."

Small aside: FB is significantly easier for her to deal with than email as it provides more contextual cues about who she is communicating with (primarily seeing profile pictures next to messages).

[alain94040]

To many people, Facebook is the default communication channel

Exactly. Many of us geeks have dreamed of improved e-mail clients, better to-do lists... but frankly for the average person, they want to hear from their kids and relatives, easily see pictures of birthdays. Guess what: Facebook is years ahead of email clients for that purpose. Come up with a better client if you want to, but understand that some people have "simple" needs and your decade-old technology (what has changed since UUCP?) gets in the way.

[pyre]

  > your decade-old technology [...] gets in the way

You're right! Here's some decade-old technologies that we should drop (they're 'decade-old', so they are obviously in the way!): TCP, IP, UDP, HTTP, FTP, SSH, etc...

[pavanky]

How is this different from someone saying, I am offended you don't smoke weed, or I am offended, in this country of XYZ religion, you are not ?

[tedunangst]

If you don't smoke, that doesn't prevent other people from smoking. If you're not on FB, that does prevent other people from messaging/whatever you on FB.

[khyryk]

"you're removing value from other people's valued medium/experience" because smoking can be a social exercise.

[fl3tch]

My God, you're right. I was never able to contact anybody before Facebook. It's a wonder I know other people at all.

Seriously, though, the biggest argument in favor of it that I hear is event invitations. But think about it, if the most effort that somebody can put into inviting you to their event is clicking a button to "send to all", they don't really value your friendship. I don't have a Facebook account, and when people invite me to something, they send a personal message that signals they actually value my friendship and want me to attend. As someone on the Internet said, Facebook maintains friendships in a persistent vegetative state.

[millzlane]

Want to know the difference between people who use facebook and the people that don't?

The difference is that the people who don't use Facebook care that you do.

We just don't like being left out because we don't have Facebook.

[fudged]

Religion is vaguely similar... but the entirety of my argument is based on the literal social network and the strong ties and attributes that it carries. The value of individual social ties in a larger network.

I don't think that pot is related to this in any way.