Now if only facebook would tell people it wasn't public. It's a post by someone you don't know showing up, how subtle is the marking that it's not actually public, if any?
People can't be expected to ask before hitting "share" on a post shown as public, can they?
Right. She should have seen an icon that showed "friends" rather than public. I think the "share" button remains and (if I'm not mistaken) only people within the original permission will be shown your "share" in their feed. This could, however, give the impression that you could just pop the photo into Twitter, however. There is "download" right in that "options" menu.
Yeah she was not friends with Randi but apparently friends with one of Randi's friends. Agreed -- it is very confusing. G+ gives you a nice big warning before resharing something within G+. But of course we know that this was shared in a completely different social network (twitter), Callie obviously saved the pic and then reuploaded to twitpic (automatically or manually). Which imho isn't very classy no matter the original privacy settings.
It was showing up for Callie, who was not friends with Randi. I think most people would assume that means it's public, when it fact it's just an example of the fact that privacy on Facebook is really confusing.
From eyeballing my feed just now it looks as though any post that's a link can be shared. Then, the link is shared "via X." But only a public status itself gets the share button.
