I have no specific knowledge of this case, but ...
> Perhaps a polite request to keep quiet. Who knows, Facebook is still a teenager in many respects so it's anybody's guess.
My experience with just about any company is that they would state their hopes as facts, and expect you to accept that as a fact. And it works with the vast majority of people.
Case (from outside the US): Credit card got a fraudulent charge. Called up the credit card company, disputing the charge (After credit card company was already paid by an automated payment service).
Credit card company: "Well, we're keeping your money, the law says we have 60 days to figure out if you are right or the merchant is right; if you are right, we'll give you back the money".
Me: "Ahhm. The law says you have to give me back the money this instant, and you have 60 days to figure out if you believe that the charge wasn't fraudulent; and if you do, you can explain it to me, and if I still disagree then there's a whole section in the law about that but you don't get any money automatically either"
Credit company: "Oh, you're right. Here's your money back, we'll be in touch in at most 6o days".
I understand. However, this is a savvy blogger who is looking for publicity. Facebook contacted him to defuse a potential PR situation, he didn't call them. You'd imagine they would be smarter than that, after all they are the world experts in virality and social media. Like I said, it's anybody's guess.
> Facebook contacted him to defuse a potential PR situation, he didn't call them
From the description, it sounds like the security department called him, not the PR department. And sounds like they're sort of OK as a security department, but that they DID need to coordinate with the PR department in this case, and they didn't.
> You'd imagine they would be smarter than that, after all they are the world experts in virality and social media
Their product people are experts in virality and social media. Their PR people - I don't know, I guess they're ok. Their security people? Obviously not. They just moved quickly and broke things for the PR department to fix.
If the blogger is lying, I'm sure facebook will shame them publicly - they have a recording, after all.
> My experience with just about any company is that they would state their hopes as facts, and expect you to accept that as a fact. And it works with the vast majority of people.
You're right but it also backfires with others, like this guy.
> Perhaps a polite request to keep quiet. Who knows, Facebook is still a teenager in many respects so it's anybody's guess.
My experience with just about any company is that they would state their hopes as facts, and expect you to accept that as a fact. And it works with the vast majority of people.
Case (from outside the US): Credit card got a fraudulent charge. Called up the credit card company, disputing the charge (After credit card company was already paid by an automated payment service).
Credit card company: "Well, we're keeping your money, the law says we have 60 days to figure out if you are right or the merchant is right; if you are right, we'll give you back the money".
Me: "Ahhm. The law says you have to give me back the money this instant, and you have 60 days to figure out if you believe that the charge wasn't fraudulent; and if you do, you can explain it to me, and if I still disagree then there's a whole section in the law about that but you don't get any money automatically either"
Credit company: "Oh, you're right. Here's your money back, we'll be in touch in at most 6o days".