"Being a Stalker"
Well guys, in an unprecedented feat, Wesleyan has thrown itself onto the forefront of progress on these internets. Instead of outsourcing to Google, we’ve beat them to the punch. Google has been trying to craft a Facebook competitor, and everyone knows Facebook serves one and only purpose: stalking. If you want to talk with people, you can just go to the ACB and be a homophobic, antisemitic misogynist even though you’re a female-bodied queer Jew in real life. Or maybe you could interact with people in real life (yeah right, bro). The Wesleyan version cuts to the chase, giving you a picture of the person and where to find them.
We’ve always had the stalker guide, but on September 15th, it’ll be new and improved! Based on Dean Culliton’s email this morning (let’s not kill the messenger), let’s look at the pros and cons:
Go to your facebook, type a period into the search bar and wait a moment. Five names should appear in the dropdown bar. Don’t press enter, just wait for a list of names to appear directly below the search.
Gawker reports that there are a number of theories about who these 5 people represent, but the first and clearly the best of these is the “Five people who search for your name most often” theory. The next most plausible (albeit less exciting) one would be the “Five people YOU search for most often” theory.
Do this quick before it’s gone! Feel free to comment on which theory you support. My own results would indicate that the original theory has the potential to be for real.
*edit by Sam*
The list is apparently now in alphabetical order, and apparently Facebook sent a reply to Gawker saying that:
“Facebook tries to surface the people we think are most important to users to make it easier and faster for them to navigate the site and find what they are looking for…The search drop down is not a list of those that have searched for the user. It is also not a list of people whose profile the user has viewed the most or who have viewed the user’s profile the most. To avoid any confusion, this will no longer appear.”
So do we believe them? Or do we continue speculating about what it might have been? Given that this post has received more replies faster than any other I can remember, probably the latter…