Circles isn't really new. It's definitely implemented better (exposed and integrated), but it suffers from what I think is a serious weakness: hidden complexity. When you think about it as a broadcast, it's very simple and straightforward, but when someone in one of your Circles starts commenting/talking back, it gets a lot more complicated.
Appleseed has already addressed this. When you comment, a push notification is sent to the group defined the context. Actions are not broadcast, contexts are.
IE, Alice posts a blog, which is available to Group A. Bob posts a comment to the blog, and members of Group A are notified (even if they're not on Bob's friends list). Chris, who is on Bob's friends list, but not a member of Group A, will not receive a notification.
That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/uncertainty there that equals friction to every secondary action (like a comment).
So there's two problems: 1. Bob might comment on Alice's post thinking he's in his own social context, which is reinforced by the fact that on Google+, he's in his own UI and Alice's post shows up in his Circle; 2. Bob has to consciously check to see what the context is every time he wants to make a comment on Alice's post.
My idea for a potential solution is "Places." Which is through the link I posted above.
It's the same in Google+, but you still have to consciously check. My point being that it's not really the functionality that matters per se, it's the metaphor. Having the explicit metaphor gives you an immediate understanding of how the information flows. Having an optional setting checked does not.
Comments
Circles isn't really new. It's definitely implemented better (exposed and integrated), but it suffers from what I think is a serious weakness: hidden complexity. When you think about it as a broadcast, it's very simple and straightforward, but when someone in one of your Circles starts commenting/talking back, it gets a lot more complicated.
More thorough explanation here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2714333
Appleseed has already addressed this. When you comment, a push notification is sent to the group defined the context. Actions are not broadcast, contexts are.
IE, Alice posts a blog, which is available to Group A. Bob posts a comment to the blog, and members of Group A are notified (even if they're not on Bob's friends list). Chris, who is on Bob's friends list, but not a member of Group A, will not receive a notification.
That's still potentially confusing, though. Bob has no idea who is part of Group A apart from himself. He could probably check, but there's a cognitive load/uncertainty there that equals friction to every secondary action (like a comment).
So there's two problems: 1. Bob might comment on Alice's post thinking he's in his own social context, which is reinforced by the fact that on Google+, he's in his own UI and Alice's post shows up in his Circle; 2. Bob has to consciously check to see what the context is every time he wants to make a comment on Alice's post.
My idea for a potential solution is "Places." Which is through the link I posted above.
In Appleseed, you can set a Circle to be viewable by it's members, so it's similar in function to how you describe "Places".
It's the same in Google+, but you still have to consciously check. My point being that it's not really the functionality that matters per se, it's the metaphor. Having the explicit metaphor gives you an immediate understanding of how the information flows. Having an optional setting checked does not.
Google already has a product named Places (I think it's kind of like Yelp?), but I get your meaning.