# Military and Facebook



## NSDreamer (22 Sep 2010)

So I was just somewhat surprised to come home from a training exercise to see privates from my unit attempting to add me on facebook. Suffice to say, I didn't click yes as I feel that allowing troops in my unit into my personal life is a bad idea in regards towards my being in a leadership position. 

 I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the matter of troops respecting boundaries in situations like this and similar situations?


----------



## Davionn (22 Sep 2010)

NSDreamer said:
			
		

> So I was just somewhat surprised to come home from a training exercise to see privates from my unit attempting to add me on facebook. Suffice to say, I didn't click yes as I feel that allowing troops in my unit into my personal life is a bad idea in regards towards my being in a leadership position.
> 
> I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the matter of troops respecting boundaries in situations like this and similar situations?





I think it's up to you and your comfort level.  Nothing wrong with declining, IMO.

I usually accept the invite (don't realy seek them), but in doing so, I place them in a special list with particular privacy settings.  The troops see only what I'm comfortable showing them.


----------



## bdave (22 Sep 2010)

I don't see the problem with it.
A few members of my BMQ(c) added me and that's fine.
As long as they/you are professional and 'respect the boundaries' when you are on DND property or in uniform, I would think it would be fine. If they start posting stupid stuff on your wall, you can always "remove them as a friend".
That being said, you can limit how much info they can see using your privacy settings.


----------



## Nemecek (22 Sep 2010)

And remember, it goes both ways too. You might lose some respect along the line if your statuses are things along the lines of: "Ahhh man, so hungover. Can't believe how fat the girl was I went home with last night." 

Not saying you will post that at all, but just keep it in mind. 

We're all people in the end. We all have our personal lives and likes or dislikes. Just because someone is a subordinate doesn't mean by any stretch you can't be friends with them. It's like any work situation. Just be smart about it.


----------



## Shamrock (22 Sep 2010)

My Facebook friends run the gamut from no hook privates to a couple of light colonels.  Everything is categorized, and I'm cautious about what I post.  However, I find social networking an effective aide to leadership.  In essence, I treat it as an electronic all ranks mess.


----------



## stealthylizard (22 Sep 2010)

The only military friends I have as a no-hook private, are cpl's and below.  If they get promoted (appointed) to M/Cpl I remove them.  I am somewhat old school in the belief that there is a line of familiarity that shouldn't be crossed between various ranks of NCM's.  But that being said, facebook was the preferred method of communication in Afghanistan between KAF and FOB's.  For some reason, facebook was more reliable than official online military communication methods, and the phone wasn't any better.


----------



## Trueblue (22 Sep 2010)

IMO,

it all depends on what sort of working relationship you have with the guy, if you're a master corporal and you are working along side him on a daily basis I don't see anything wrong with him attempting to add you...

that being said if you are a bit higher up in the sense that you would only see him at work if he was in crap, that may be a little bit too much.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Sep 2010)

I have my supervisor and some of my subordinates on my Facebook. We're a close section, but we all know where the line is between military bearing and being friends outside of work.


----------



## aesop081 (22 Sep 2010)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I have my supervisor and some of my subordinates on my Facebook. We're a close section, but we all know where the line is between military bearing and being friends outside of work.



The trouble we are running into now is that most of us have been flying together for years, are all fairly senior and are all quite casual with eachother (officers and NCMs). We are now starting to get our first privates and they dont know or understand where that line is and we have to thread carefuly so they dont get themselves in trouble. Regardless of the method used, what i say can have a big impact so i tend to stay away from the new folks on FB.


----------



## PuckChaser (23 Sep 2010)

Yep, that's a good point. Like you said, most new troops don't know the line yet, and even sometimes their military bearing is lacking. My shop is all Cpls and MCpls, so there's less of a "new guy" issue for us.


----------



## toughenough (23 Sep 2010)

Just from looking in your profile, I'd caution you to remember that typically these no hooks will mirror your career path quite closely. I'm not sure how things go in the service battalion, so this is written in context of an infantry unit.

Right now you are an OCdt, and they are no hooks. When you are fully trained, you'll be a brand new 2LT and they they'll be a new Pte. You'll be shaped and molded and guided by your Pl 2iC, and they Pte will have the same experience with his Sect 2iC or Sr Cpls.

When you become an LT, you'll be comfortable in leading your Pl and doing your job. He'll become a Cpl and be comfortable in his job and start taking on more and more leadership responsibility. When you're staring down the barrel of Capt, he'll be setting his sights on MCpl.

He'll be shaping more troops more directly then you will be at this point (or probably any point). He can or make or break the morale of his section, and possible the platoon. You'll be relying on him to have his troops meet your (and higher's) intent. He will be enforcing some level of discipline, and will be ensuring his troops don't go down from carelessness with regards to pers admin, hygiene, kit, etc.

When/if you ever take over a company, he'll be there as a Sr NCO.

In theory, one day when you take over your unit, he'll be there as a CSM or RSM.

Hopefully you see where I'm going with this. Please don't think you are above your troops. You need them. If you are the man you should be to be leading, you'll have nothing to hide, and won't mind the troops respecting you for what you really are, and not just what you are for 3 hours one night a week.


----------



## NSDreamer (23 Sep 2010)

Tha





			
				toughenough said:
			
		

> Just from looking in your profile, I'd caution you to remember that typically these no hooks will mirror your career path quite closely. I'm not sure how things go in the service battalion, so this is written in context of an infantry unit.
> 
> Right now you are an OCdt, and they are no hooks. When you are fully trained, you'll be a brand new 2LT and they they'll be a new Pte. You'll be shaped and molded and guided by your Pl 2iC, and they Pte will have the same experience with his Sect 2iC or Sr Cpls.
> 
> ...



 In response to this, I believe in that very strongly. While my career will likely not keep me with this unit when I CT, it's still important to remember that. After all, I won't be the only one. Besides you owe a debt of respect, I feel, as an officer to troopies. They may be rowdy and always F*** you over without meaning to, but they also do the grunt work, while I'm writing down orders and plans they're hucking gear up the 105 because the MLVW broke down and can only go at 60Kmph and as a result have to double time when they get to obj to unload.


----------



## Danjanou (23 Sep 2010)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> My Facebook friends run the gamut from no hook privates to a couple of light colonels.  Everything is categorized, and I'm cautious about what I post.  However, I find social networking an effective aide to leadership.  In essence, I treat it as an electronic all ranks mess.



Kind of like this site 8)


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Sep 2010)

I can't stand facebook, it's retarded how people update EVERYTHING.
I just got my hair cut, I'm reading a book, I just watched a funny commercial. 

I only use facebook to keep in touch with army friends from tour and soldiers from my regiment.  As much as I hate it facebook makes keeping in touch with people pretty easy. Good for passing off non secure information about ex's, mess parties, timings etc..

It can backfire though.  I had a friend get an email while he was overseas because an officer at his unit saw his picture on facebook. He was in the field for Op Medusa and unshaven   
 The adj at this guys reserve unit back in Canada wanted the deployed soldier charged..
Also pictures from a mess party were put on facebook on a young soldiers personal page and an officer was snooping and took issue with some pictures he didn't like.


As an officer you'll be under the scope for everything you do, or post.


----------



## Haggis (23 Sep 2010)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> Also pictures from a mess party were put on facebook on a young soldiers personal page and an officer was snooping and took issue with some pictures he didn't like.



And rightfully so, if those photos violate the law or contravene command direction.  Remember, the CO is ultimately responsible for everything that happens in a unit - good or bad - and relies on his officers and NCOs to keep him out of shyte.  Imagine how much trouble it could've been if the snooper had been a liquor inspector or journalist?

Many employers also surf Facebook (and other social networking sites) for information and insight about potential employees.  Some go as far as asking to be temporarily added as a friend on your site as part of the hiring process.  If you're not comfortable with sharing a photo/comment/status update with the entire world then you have three choices:

1. adjust your privacy settings to mirror your comfort zone;
2. be very selective and somehat discriminatory about who you "accept" as Facebook friends;
3. don't post the photo/comment/staus update.

The same caveats can be applied to e-mail addresses as well.  Sending an electronic application form from the e-mail account _throbbinghotstud(at)hotmail.com _ will probably not get you an interview.

(Edited to ensure the fictional e-mail account wouldn't work)


----------



## Bluebulldog (23 Sep 2010)

Being one of the aforementioned no-hook privates I'll lump in my 2 cents.

My Res unit has a page on facebook, which many of the currently serving members are on. It's a great middle ground, without adding people to your friends. You can however change your privacy settings to allow members of that group to see a few more details.

Now I'm a little older than most privates, and have a better sense of what is proper or not. IMHO I think it comes down to comfort level. Let's see...if you're not comfortable walking up to the person and saying "let's grab a beer in the mess" then you probably shouldn't be adding them on FB. If you work pretty closely with someone, then by all means.


----------



## PuckChaser (23 Sep 2010)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> It can backfire though.  I had a friend get an email while he was overseas because an officer at his unit saw his picture on facebook. He was in the field for Op Medusa and unshaven
> The adj at this guys reserve unit back in Canada wanted the deployed soldier charged..
> Also pictures from a mess party were put on facebook on a young soldiers personal page and an officer was snooping and took issue with some pictures he didn't like.



I have one officer on my Facebook, because I trust him to confront me directly if there was something inappropriate relating to the CF on my profile. Its just better to keep 1 or 2 ranks up and 1 or 2 ranks down only, unless you know for sure they won't be doing things like you described.


----------



## AgentSmith (25 Sep 2010)

I've got a bunch of my army friends on facebook ranging from people from my BMQ to people I work with in my unit, from Pte all the way up to WO and 2 Lt. I don't see it as any big deal. I respect peoples boundaries at work as far as rank goes but after work I'm not afraid to go out and have a beer with them.


----------



## Shamrock (25 Sep 2010)

AgentSmith said:
			
		

> ... all the way up to WO and 2 Lt.



That's a contradiction.


----------



## AgentSmith (25 Sep 2010)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> That's a contradiction.



What do you mean?


----------



## Shamrock (25 Sep 2010)

A warrant will have anywhere from 10, 15, to 20 years of service and will have worked very hard and have been very competitive to have earned his rank.

A 2Lt will have anywhere from 10 weeks to 3 years of service and will have completed BMOQ but is likely not yet even qualified in his trade.


----------



## AgentSmith (26 Sep 2010)

Good point, but still I like to separate NCM's and Officers. I guess I just usually looked at officers as always being higher up than me regardless of time in as even a 2Lt can still be a course officer.


----------



## Bluebulldog (26 Sep 2010)

Regardless of the timelines, agent, you pretty well just illustrated what I posted earlier, if you don't have a repertoire with the person, regardless of their rank, then adding them to FB, where they can see intimate details of your life, and you may see theirs, isn't kosher.


----------



## AgentSmith (26 Sep 2010)

I don't just add people for the sake of adding them. Anyone I add from the army is someone I've worked with and know well.


----------



## canada94 (16 Oct 2010)

If you know/like/respect/trust them add them. If you don't then, don't. Facebook is private and everyone's personal preference. Being young and still in high school. EVERYDAY I have random morons from around the world it seems adding me with the dumbest motives as well. 

Just be careful who your adding on any site. But for the higher ranking members, you have to remember that the younger members have almost had Facebook embedded into their lives. Like i know this sounds sad, but my Fb is how i connect with friends/ plan what I'm doing, keep myself organized etc. And their motive to adding you might simply, having the ability of asking you a question if they need to ; or anything.


----------



## Swingline1984 (16 Oct 2010)

canada94 said:
			
		

> And their motive to adding you might simply, having the ability of asking you a question if they need to ; or anything.



Sounds like a great example of circumventing the chain of command.  My subordinates have my cell and home number should they find themselves in a bind and I sure as hell don't need to see pictures of them being drunk and foolish nor do I want to have to start an investigation over something the Platoon Commander or god forbid the OC saw on their profile.  They have their right to a modicum of privacy and so do I.


----------



## canada94 (16 Oct 2010)

Swingline1984 said:
			
		

> Sounds like a great example of circumventing the chain of command.  My subordinates have my cell and home number should they find themselves in a bind and I sure as hell don't need to see pictures of them being drunk and foolish nor do I want to have to start an investigation over something the Platoon Commander or god forbid the OC saw on their profile.  They have their right to a modicum of privacy and so do I.



I know what your saying, but I was just saying that their intentions on adding you probably don't even cross their mind as/ invading privacy as it is embedded in society, to the young more-so.


----------



## Strike (16 Oct 2010)

canada94 said:
			
		

> I know what your saying, but I was just saying that their intentions on adding you probably don't even cross their mind as/ invading privacy as it is embedded in society, to the young more-so.



And that's exactly why society is becoming less communicative, because people no longer know how to talk to people face to face, especially about issues that need to be dealt with or questions they need answers for.

Yes, I am sitting in a 2 day class about effective communications right now.


----------



## NSDreamer (16 Oct 2010)

Well I added the Pte now Cpl in question. She didn't even talk to me until she had a question related to work so I think you may have been right. I on the other hand very carefully don't look at her profile heh.


----------



## canada94 (16 Oct 2010)

Strike said:
			
		

> And that's exactly why society is becoming less communicative, because people no longer know how to talk to people face to face, especially about issues that need to be dealt with or questions they need answers for.
> 
> Yes, I am sitting in a 2 day class about effective communications right now.



I agree there! Everyone matures differently socially but as society uses alternatives to communicating, face to face communication becomes less frequent. It just depends on the type of person you are as well. Born to two RCMP, I was raised to deal with problems/communication in person. This site is a good example! People ask questions here on this site that they could simply ask their recruiter's in person or over the phone, yet they still choose not to. 

As for members adding members on Fb. I truly believe any member that is socially challenged; Will not last long within the Forces. Vocal communication is IMPERATIVE within occupations such as the Forces.


----------



## Greymatters (16 Oct 2010)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> I can't stand facebook, it's retarded how people update EVERYTHING.
> I just got my hair cut, I'm reading a book, I just watched a funny commercial.
> 
> I only use facebook to keep in touch with army friends from tour and soldiers from my regiment.  As much as I hate it facebook makes keeping in touch with people pretty easy. Good for passing off non secure information about ex's, mess parties, timings etc..
> ...



As long as you're in the military its really not a good idea to post any photos or comments in publicly accessable forums.

And that Adj really has better things to do than to surf Facebook and check up on his troops...


----------



## dogger1936 (16 Oct 2010)

NSDreamer said:
			
		

> Well I added the Pte now Cpl in question. She didn't even talk to me until she had a question related to work so I think you may have been right. I on the other hand very carefully don't look at her profile heh.



That right there is a big rule of mine. If someone pass's on information via facebook IRT work they are gone. I have a mix of captain to pte on mine, however we hang out after work etc. However when someone facebook messages me "what are our timings for tomorrow" there gone.


----------



## Cdnleaf (16 Oct 2010)

> Well I added the Pte now Cpl in question. She didn't even talk to me until she had a question related to work so I think you may have been right. I on the other hand very carefully don't look at her profile heh.



"heh" - what?  It doesn't matter if you looked at her profile - you're facebook pals.  Be prepared to add every pte/cpl from your org to your facebook page or provide an explanation why.  There is an important nuance in what Swingline1984 said above.  What do you think is going to happen when he/she comes to you on a Monday morning with an incident concerning soldier X - and you say, sure I know this person, BTW they're also one of my facebook pals...  :rofl:   You don't think stuff like that doesn't get around or comes out - dreaming. 

WRT your other post, respect your troops and don't call them "troopies." IMO as an OCdt you should be just as tired, dirty and hauling kit with them (grunt work you mentioned.)  G'luck.


----------



## NSDreamer (16 Oct 2010)

cdnleaf said:
			
		

> WRT your other post, respect your troops and don't call them "troopies." IMO as an OCdt you should be just as tired, dirty and hauling kit with them (grunt work you mentioned.)  G'luck.



 Hrm, I did not mean any disrespect by the term troopies. It's just a term I picked up from other officers I guess, I did not realize it sounded condescending and as such will cease to use it. In regards to tired, dirty and hauling kit with them...yeeeeep.


----------



## brandon_ (16 Oct 2010)

During my BMQ (co-op) We were not allowed to have any pictures relating to the army. PERIOD. If we did The Platoon WO Somehow found it, and 'talked to us'. A Particular troop didn't show up one day, and updated his facebook status saying how he was s hungover, and wasn't going to work today, the WO found it, and buddy was on his way out of the military very soon after. So keep it professional.  As mentioned before, if I don't feel comfortable going up to the member and having a drink with after in the mess, then i really shouldn't be having them on facebook.

by the way, i don't see troopies as disrespectful at all.


----------



## wildman0101 (16 Oct 2010)

Troopie's,,,,, Troopie's. Were not your Tin Soldier's. We are your TROOP'S.
As far as Facebook. If you think that network is secure with your personal
info think again. Facebook is a Social Network. Enphasis on Social. Depend-
ing on your privacy setting's you can and have been compromised. This is 
in regard's to the cake **** that phished/spammed 560,000 member's on 
facebook and was fined 600 U.S. for each member he phished/spammed.
That was just on the new's Global T.V. BC a day ago..Regard's our Cavalry
cousin's the R.C.M.P all they is is reasonable. Including email ect that was
just passed. 
Next time your down-town look around,, vid cam's in bank's,,, street corner's
alley's, apt building's, Mall's,washroom's,,,ect Big Brother has allway's been 
there like since the 50's...
Anyway be careful what you put out there.
Just my 2C.
Scoty B


----------



## Strike (16 Oct 2010)

Wow.  I have a box of tin foil with which you can fashion a wonderful hat if you like.


----------



## wildman0101 (17 Oct 2010)

To Whom it may Concern. Regard's the "Tin-Foil" comment that was to WHO.
Your response please Capt "tin foil" kitty kat? And the post and the person 
your replying too. Like I'am doing. Or are you a P**** cat.
Scoty B


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Oct 2010)

Great example Brandon.  I know of a soldier who was on "half days" for medical stress leave but was commenting about the second job they were going to during the other half day period on facebook and got caught that way.




Here's ethical question- Is this inappropriate of a section commander.


A reservist  with a driver qualification commits himself to going on advance party for an ex and driving one of the vehicles up to base.  4 days before the exercise the member informs his section commander that he isn't going on the ex and doesn't want any more work because he received an offer for the reg force and leaves in a month or two.
The section commander says that's garbage. There isn't anyone else available that weekend to drive the vehicle he said he would drive and he (the member) received a LOT of work and taskings over the last year or two from the unit and should at least make it out for one last weekend, especially because he is needed.

The member caves in and says he'll go.  The night before the ex the member turns around and tells his section commander that his dad has X wrong with him and the member needs to take him back and forth to the hospital every day, no one else is available.

Member doesn't go on the ex, after some effort and a few headaches a driver is found.

After the ex the section commander logs into his facebook and notices some posts by the member about unrelated things. He goes to the members profile and leaves a public message.

"The ex went well, sorry you couldn't make it.  Don't worry the chain of command knows you couldn't make it out because a family member was hospitalized, how are they by the way? Still in the hospital? If you need anything let me know".

Now you can suggest the section  commander was just checking in on one of his soldiers however the section commander made it public with the full intention of calling out the soldier's excuse.


----------



## NSDreamer (18 Oct 2010)

Hrm, well I think it would be hard to prove that the section commander would do that. If the intent was to call out the member, then he would undoubtably be out of line. 

 Quite a petty thing to do really. However if he is being sincere I see no problem with it. As it is hard to prove either way, I think it falls in a grey area.


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Oct 2010)

NSDreamer said:
			
		

> Hrm, well I think it would be hard to prove that the section commander would do that. If the intent was to call out the member, then he would undoubtably be out of line.
> 
> Quite a petty thing to do really. However if he is being sincere I see no problem with it. As it is hard to prove either way, I think it falls in a grey area.



Which is petty, the section commander subtly alerting the members family that the member is using them as an excuse to get out of work? Or the member pulling his name off the job last minute because he doesn't need the money anymore?


----------



## Swingline1984 (18 Oct 2010)

Grimaldus said:
			
		

> Here's an ethical question...



Moral and ethical issue?  Maybe, but the real crime is that either the guy had his privacy settings so wide open anyone in the northern hemisphere could read and comment or that the section commander was his "friend" to begin with.

In regards to the former, if you have your settings open, your profile picture is a hero shot, and all you talk about is work then don't be surprised if your spouse gets a call from Mulah Omar uttering threats.  Heard of OPSEC?  Well there is also a little thing called PERSEC.


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Oct 2010)

Swingline1984 said:
			
		

> In regards to the former, if you have your settings open, your profile picture is a hero shot, and all you talk about is work then don't be surprised if your spouse gets a call from Mulah Omar uttering threats.  Heard of OPSEC?  Well there is also a little thing called PERSEC.


A few members of my regiment overseas have, for example,


   * DND 33 CBGSeptember 2005 to present
      Cpl/driver/rifleman
      Petawawa, Ontario
      *********  attact to 1 RCR 

Another I've seen even has her mailing address.


----------



## Greymatters (24 Oct 2010)

Swingline1984 said:
			
		

> In regards to the former, if you have your settings open, your profile picture is a hero shot, and all you talk about is work then don't be surprised if your spouse gets a call from Mulah Omar uttering threats.  Heard of OPSEC?  Well there is also a little thing called PERSEC.



Thats rather stereotyped. It doesnt neccesarily have to be someone of a foreign persuasion,  I'd expect a call from a local anti-war university student than from someone attached to a beligerent overseas organization.  

Out of curioisity, has anyone on this site ever had someone call their house and make threats to them or their family because of their work overseas?  Does anyone on this site know of anyone else or their family who got called and had threats made?


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Oct 2010)

Greymatters said:
			
		

> I'd expect a call from a local anti-war university student than from someone attached to a beligerent overseas organization.



You suggest they are not one in the same


----------



## Greymatters (27 Oct 2010)

Thats just me being specific..


----------

