As far as I'm concerned, if a service you like, does something you dislike, you should complain, and you should tell people about it. Especially if the service is used by tens of millions of people and is growing at the rate that Google+ is.
It sounds like you disagree with this though. Why? Why do you think he should have kept his mouth shut?
"this is already the standard for any currently popular social network"
And it will remain so, if people don't complain loudly enough that an alternative is created which behaves differently.
He's not complaining about anything that anyone has a problem with (ok maybe SOME people do want to see people giving them the finger in their stream). He's just whining about G+ like he always does, like a baby.
Your general statements don't apply here. If you want to argue, then tell me why you want to see people flicking you off on G+ and why you think that's something that should be OK for everyone.
I dont "want to see people giving them the finger in their stream" but at the same time I want even less for Google to censor minor stuff like that. If they're going to be that restrictive I have very little reason to believe they won't also censor things I'd care a lot more about.
I already use Google+ far more than Facebook, but they keep stepping in it and making me less and less hopeful about it being long term viable as a replacement.
If you want to argue, then tell me why you want to see people flicking you off on G+ and why you think that's something that should be OK for everyone.
It has nothing to do with wanting to see people flicking someone off, but with not wanting to see Google take the role of moral censor and deciding for us what's "offensive" or not.
I see. So the reason you think he should keep his mouth shut, is because you perceive his issue to be a minority issue. How many people need to have a problem with something before it's ok for them to complain about it?
Just because you disagree with somebodys opinion, doesn't mean they were wrong to express it.
I didn't say any of these things. He can keep his mouth open if he wants and he has every right to express his opinion. It's just a matter of judgement on which opinions to express, and "clearly" he misused his judgement here.
However, the point I'm making is, all things considered, I don't think he had much of an argument for this case, and it's more of just a cheap shot at G+ (he could have instead addressed it to all social networks instead of G+ too..). He kind of has a track record for these things though..
Let me put it this way: if somebody's profile picture bugs me, and it appears in my stream more than a couple times, that's on me. It's quite simple to take somebody out of your circles, and even to block them completely.
It sounds like you disagree with this though. Why? Why do you think he should have kept his mouth shut?
"this is already the standard for any currently popular social network"
And it will remain so, if people don't complain loudly enough that an alternative is created which behaves differently.