There aren’t many days left in 2011 as I write this. To appreciate it, I’m going to post a Facebook status each day that starts with
- You know it was a good year when
and ends with a reason why it was a good year. Why?
There aren’t many days left in 2011 as I write this. To appreciate it, I’m going to post a Facebook status each day that starts with
and ends with a reason why it was a good year. Why?
This is a new type of Facebook tagging that can really get you into trouble, if you dare to use it!
That’s because you have to decide which of your Facebook friends are the best looking, and tell everyone else about it in tagging them! Those who make your list will love you for it! Those who don’t, definitely won’t! This will be especially true if they think they are better looking than someone else on your list. How they react will vary, but you’ll have to live with the consequences. 🙂
Can you handle the stress and pressure? If so, let’s get going!
You can either do this outright, males and females in the mix, or you can do it with males competing against each other, and same with females. Don’t think of it as being sexist, but rather that you can reward 20 people instead of 10, and bruise 10 fewer egos. 🙂
If you do it with males and females separately, pick the memes called Guy Edition and Girl Edition, respectively. If you mix males and females, you’ll have to make your Top 10 list first. Then see how many females are in the mix and choose the meme with the same number of females.
Here in Canada, for a lot of American sport events, the American commercials are replaced with terrible Canadian ones. This is true even on cable on the American channel itself, not just the simultaneous broadcast on the local network. In Nova Scotia, where I am located, the commercials are even sub Canadian standards. They’re so awful I will often skip watching a show or an event, or go out to a place where I can watch it without those commercials. Or I’ll get what I’m looking for from another source, like news from CBC NewsWorld or MSNBC instead of CNN that’s now proliferated with ghetto budget local business ads when I’m there to be thinking globally.
Do these Canadian ad buyers think they’re getting their money’s worth for those prime spots?
I know there are some rules about rights across the borders, and Canadian content rules and such, but that’s for the channels to worry about. The ad buyers don’t have to buy in to this, and without them, the channels don’t have commercials to run. The channels probably offer ad time with events like the Super Bowl as a bonus to a package rather than selling ad time during the event like it’s done in the US. Still, I would decline it if I were a Canadian ad buyer cause I don’t think people think of those spots fondly.
This comes to a point with the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl is as well known for its ads as the game itself. Just observe the chatter the day after the Super Bowl. To watch the Super Bowl with local commercials is like to watch the Super Bowl with one real team and one team of local substitute players. I resent having to watch the Super Bowl with crappy Canadian commercials so much I watch the event on broadcasts with American commercials now, I have blocked the Canadian channels overriding American signals. That means CTV for this Super Bowl, and Global and ASN from previous other offences.
Now, those channels don’t even have a chance that I might surf by and catch something I like when channel surfing. I get local news from the CBC solely now, and you know what? I’m doing just fine without those other channels. I’m not even losing Canadian content, cause it’s not like they show much Canadian content anyway. Why bother with Canadian commercials on prime events, or even just for the Super Bowl, if resentment like this, with some people turning it into action, is what you get?
For events less prime than the Super Bowl, where I might put up with Canadian ads on overridden American shows, I take note of some of the advertising companies and occasionally put them on my “no buy” list. It’s not that I end up watching the commercials to do this. Usually, they annoy me enough from what I’m doing to distract me, and then it’s an easy choice. Eastlink was the first on my list.
I wonder if some of these companies ever imagined their advertising strategies to lead to this?
Oh, and here’s a great example why I go the extra distance for the Super Bowl with the real ads. 🙂
The average Facebook user today has 130 friends. But how many of them would that average user really call a friend? And by friend, I mean just “friend”. I don’t mean anything like “true friend”, “real friend”, “good friend” or the like. Just someone you’d call a friend.
That would be hard to get a consistent answer since different people have different standards for who they call a friend. For some, only the truest of friends get called a friend. For others, anyone who might have followed them on Twitter, or vice-versa, counts as a friend. What we need is some sort of standard definition for “friend” to move this forward.

Aristotle
Interestingly, a good definition for “friend” can be found over 2300 years ago courtesy of the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC).
If we accept all three of these categories to be friends, as Aristotle called them three types of friends, we then have a pretty broad definition of friend, but one which I would be happy to accept. Question then is if these definitions are still broad enough to cover how most people decide whether or not to add others as friends on Facebook. That would take a lot of resources to not only survey but to also verify. I doubt the folks at Facebook would even be able to do the latter conclusively, though I think they have a pretty good idea along the same lines I do.
From what I have seen and read of people and how they use Facebook, as well as who uses them and how, I would argue that a lot of people’s Facebook friends fall outside of Aristotle’s definition. So one would either need to expand Aristotle’s definition of friends to include these slightest of Facebook friends, or these slightest of Facebook friends aren’t really friends.
At first glance, Aristotle’s contacts category seems broad enough. After all, these slightest of Facebook friends are often people a user would have met only once, if that. They probably serve only as potential usefulness, never mind true utility. That is, they get added cause one never knows when they might be useful, not that they are likely to be useful in some way. Many people have Facebook friends just for the sake of upping their count and feel more people are paying attention to their Facebook activity. Others to avoid some situational awkwardness, like being Facebook friends with someone’s partner just because s/he is the jealous type who wants to keep an eye on their partner’s Facebook activities, when one doesn’t really give a damn if they exist. However, this adding of potentially useful friends can only happen to a point before users would not be able to remember people on their Facebook friends list. That is, if you asked them if so and so were on their Facebook friends list, they wouldn’t be able to tell you with certainty. Or if you asked them the name of certain people who are actually on their Facebook friends list, they wouldn’t be able to tell you anything about them at all, including how they got on that list in the first place.
I don’t know what the approximate average number of Facebook friends one would need to have before they would start forgetting everything about someone on that list, but I can tell you the situation would be true for some Facebook whales . That’s the term Facebook has for Facebook users with over 1,000 friends. Seriously, one thousand people is a lot of people to remember names and something about them. But if you don’t buy that people can remember details about a thousand mostly generic people, perhaps you’d believe the situation of not being able to remember anything about some Facebook friends would be true for those who have reached Facebook’s friends list limit of 5,000. Yes, there are those, too.
Poor Aristotle must be turning over in his grave at what some people constitute as friends today, though I’m sure he wouldn’t expand his definition of friends but rather state those slightest of Facebook friends are truly friends at all.
So after all that, maybe you’d like to weigh in with some opinions with a comments, like how you’d define a friend or why you keep Facebook friends you might not remember anything about, etc. Or maybe you’d just like to take some polls on Facebook friendship below (or see how others responded). The sample from this blog will be skewed because a lot of people come here for Facebook related activities so they tend to be avid Facebook users, but I’m just curious to see.
Remove 5 Facebook Friends Challenge
Which Facebook Friends Should I Remove?
“Study” on Facebook Narcissism and Insecurity not REAL Research
How to Cancel or Retract Friend Requests on Facebook… and Why?
The Prejudices and Privacy Perils of Facebook Quizzes
How to Get Rid of Your Facebook Past
25 Things For Facebook You Can’t Steal My ID With
25 Things You Gave on Facebook to Help Get Your ID Stolen
Una Guía de Netiqueta Práctica para Facebook
A Practical Facebook Etiquette (Netiquette) Guide
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Reading Level: 8.6
At the bottom are four Facebook friends tagging memes of the Transformers.
The top one is from the movie Revenge of the Fallen, while the others are from the old so-called Transformers G1 (Generation 1) cartoons. I grew up with the G1 set, but that is not why I like it more. There is just way too much detail in the new robots. There aren’t easy faces to recognize and all their parts are so detailed it looks like one good punch and the whole robot would fall apart.
The middle one is of G1 Transformers, Autobots and Decepticons.
The third one is of G1 Autobots.
The bottom one is of G1 Decepticons, to tag your BAD friends with.
The graphics used for the G1 tagging poster is from Botch’s Transformers Box Art Archive, probably the greatest collection of Transformers cartoons out there! Wow! I can spend days on that site! The detail and completeness of the collection is phenomenal, although I’d have added a bit more punch to many of the scans (i.e. a tad more contrast and saturation). However, if you’re thinking of introducing this site to your kids, just be warned that there is at least a smattering of expletives there which I have come across. That’s not so much my criticism as something to take note since I am directing people to the site.
If you would like to use the poster below for tagging your Facebook friends, please:
Please click here for a complete list of over 100 Facebook picture tagging memes on this site with which you can use for fun with your friends.
Top row:
Sideswipe (wild), Starscream (wannabe), Megatron (powerful), Ravage (sneaky)
Bottom row:
Skids (hyper), Mudflap (southpaw), Ironhide (tough), Fallen (evil)
Top row:
Prowl (good), Bruticus (brutal), Wheeljack (reliable), Thundercracker (noisy), Sideswipe (risky), Soundwave (shady)
Second row:
Shockwave (power hungry), Bumblebee (feisty), Galvatron (powerful), Jazz (cool), Cyclonus (nasty), Optimus Prime (mighty)
Third row:
Jetfire (fast), Bombshell (crazy), Mirage (sneaky), Predaking (mean), Ultra-magnus (tough), Starscream (annoying)
Bottom row:
Ravage (unpredictable), Metroplex (big), Devastator (destructive), Hound (observant), Megatron (evil), Trailbreaker (smart).
I left out Ironhide and Ratchet, two popular G1 and new movie characters, because their old robot forms were just ugly! If you want to know more about any of these characters, Adam Botch, on his site, has the box scans. Wikipedia even has lots more information and a Google search, sometimes with the word “transformers” added to the name, should get you the page as the first or second search result.
Top row:
Prowl (good), Inferno (fearless), Wheeljack (reliable), Tracks (vain), Sideswipe (risky), Ultra-magnus (tough)
Second row:
Ramhorn (bad-tempered), Bumblebee (feisty), Sludge (slow), Blaster (groovy), Smokescreen (deceptive), Optimus Prime (mighty)
Third row:
Jetfire (fast), Omega Supreme (brave), Mirage (sneaky), Jazz (cool), Sunstreaker (self-centered), Topspin (determined)
Bottom row:
Hound (observant), Metroplex (big), Bluestreak (chatty), Skids (dreamer), Rodimus Prime (impatient), Trailbreaker (smart)
Top row:
Bombshell (crazy), Bruticus (brutal), Thrust (aggressive), Predaking (tough), Thundercracker (noisy), Blitzwing (cruel)
Second row:
Shockwave (power hungry), Laserbeak (feisty), Galvatron (powerful), Ramjet (stubborn), Cyclonus (nasty), Soundwave (shady)
Third row:
Skywarp (sneaky), Octane (mean), Kickback (dirty), Astrotrain (confusing), Frenzy (tiny), Starscream (annoying)
Bottom row:
Ravage (unpredictable), Menasor (intimidating), Dirge (creepy), Devastator (destructive), Megatron (evil), Shrapnel (sadistic).