Ronald Barba is yet another one of those tech reporters who uses Google+ about once a month (and not once in the...

Ronald Barba is yet another one of those tech reporters who  uses Google+ about once a month (and not once in the past 6 months), thinks he's an expert in the stream and then tells people Google+ is dead.

My problem with people like him claiming Google+ is Zombieland is that he's not using the platform. He linkdumps a couple of times a month, at best, and then tells his friends the Plus is a deadzone. 

Just go look at his Stream: https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RonaldBarba/posts

Not only does he only broadcast instead of engaging in the conversation, but his only "+1's" are to his own publication. 

He's a clear example of what Mike Elgan spoke about in his article: I'm not using it, so no one must be using it.

I can't sit here and talk about user numbers, user engagement, statistics or anything else like that regarding the Plus. I can only say I'm not special. I don't post one kind of content (ie: a photographer or social media "expert", or other stuff), I merely post. Sometimes it's an article, other's it's an opinion. Sometimes I even post a photo or two. Even with all the people blocking me for my opinions, I still have a healthy following here. Why? Probably because I have more than 140 characters of something to say.

Below, Rob Gordon has his own issues with Google+, many of which I disagree with. Is the Plus the perfect social media platform? I would have to say, what are you using it for? None of them are "perfect," they just have better uses than others might. 

Thanks for reading this far. If you have issue with Robert Gordon's post, please click through and comment on his: https://plus.google.com/+RobGordon/posts/9hjkCau1UeC

Originally shared by Rob Gordon

The Incredible Shrinking Social Network.  First of all, I am absolutely not sharing this to bum anyone out, but nothing - and I mean nothing has made me more pessimistic or depressed about the future of Google+ then Yonatan Zunger  share of that ridiculous post that Mike Elgan wrote.

If you haven't seen it, here is the link https://goo.gl/gWeXbI where we are told that this is a rare example of a journalist "getting it right".   Not mentioned, of course, was that this "journalist" has been paid off with millions of followers through the original version of Google's corrupt "suggested users list" program.  I received private messages after I commented complimenting me on what I said, but pointing out the Google will never understand why using one of their hand picked "celebrities: from the SUL is offensive - that it just not in their nature.

The article itself is especially stupid though - even by Elgan standards.  In it we are told that anyone who says Google"+ is failing has a "cognitive bias" and that the entire tech and business press has it wrong  - including such rags as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Slate, the Huffington Post, etc.   

The cognitive bias Elgan selected to demonstrate how stupid we all are is called "the majority illusion" - where he says everyone comes here, doesn't find their friends, and immediately concludes that "Google+ has failed".  First of all, people give Google+ FAR more chance than that - many try repeatedly.  Second, this network has been here FOUR YEARS - there has been plenty of time to fix any issues, and Google shouldn't be absolved of blame.  Third, everyone knows this already - people don't come to Google+ to connect with their "old friends" - they have Facebook for that - they come to meet new people.  At that, it is OK, but not great - it is really something the user community has done here, and Google hasn't done much to make it any easier.

Elgan concludes that Google+ is "alive and well".  In reality, Google+ may be alive, but it far from "well" - it is very, very sick.  The new "collections" feature - thrown before us like pearls before swine, is mediocre at best, and I think the overall environment is far worse since they added it.   This does not make Google+ an "interest based system" as they claim - for existing users at least, it has just made our streams a chaotic mess.

Google has not been straight with us at all about what is going on - they are counting on everyone being an extremist fanboy like Elgan and to accept everything they do without question - and that may indeed be the culture they are building here.  A popular user here, who happens to live right near Google headquarters, said once about Google that "they don't talk to normal people".  I know I have never talked to a Google employee and haven't even been able to get an answer to several heartfelt messages I have written to them about the future of communities, and the normal people seem to be leaving in droves.  

Present company excepted, of course, but let me explain a "cognitive bias" I think is FAR more relevant.  It is called "suvivorship bias" and you may recall reading about the famous example.  In World War II scientists analyzed bombers that had returned to base with bullet holes, but had not been shot down.  They then reinforced with armor the areas where the bullet holes were, but just as many planes were being shot down.  In retrospect, it was obvious - the areas of the planes that were shot were in noncritical areas that had no effect on the plane's survival.  The bombers that had actually been shot down were hit in the critical areas and didn't survive to be analyzed.      

That is an almost perfect description of what happens with "the stream".  You may indeed have met cool people here, and even made friends with some of them, but unless they are constantly posting they will be "out of sight, out of mind" here on Google+.   Take a look at your own circles - and go to the individual profiles of people you like who you met here a while ago. You will likely discover that many, many of them have dropped out, and the very design of Google+ - particularly its "infinite scroll" makes it incredibly difficult to keep up with them.  The build in bias of Google+ is that you only see the heavy posters, and on the all-important use case of "keeping up with old friends and associates" - Google+ has failed. 

In my opinion, "people are more important than platforms" - but that is not the culture that Google seems to want- they seem to want a fanboy culture of people like Elgan where the main topic of conversation is Google itself , and as more and more of the normal people are not really welcome here.  As one who is not active on Facebook, I am feeling a huge sense of loss by what is happening here, but I can see the handwriting on the wall.  It is clear the Google has lost interest in Google+.  When asked about it, Google head of products Sundar Pichai said "we will get to it later this year".

For the record, I don't think Google+ will be shut down immediately - they may be misleading us, but I dont' think they are outright lying.  What I guess will happen is the next "amputation" will be Google communities.  It doesnt' really fit with the new collections feature, and Google hasn't made a single upgrade to it in over a year, and no longer communicates about it as they once did.   Whether they will just elimante it, as they recently did with shared circles, or whether they will improve it as a standalone product, I have no idea.  Even if they improve it though not talking to us is a crappy way to go about it.

So what will be left of Google+ will be the stream and collections, and it may be that for the moment Google really does intend to try to improve it, though it is clearly a low priority.   With the recent dis-integration, however, It is no longer "impossible" for Google to simply shut it down as people claimed not too long about.  As an article in Mashible said, it is not that hard to imagine that a while from now the stream will be shut down as part of their "spring cleaning" - but not to worry, all our posts will be neatly tucked away on our profile collections.