The additional resources are helpful – or at least help provide some additional context. I still can’t help thinking there may be a disconnect in assessing satisfaction for sites like this since what people get out of them is largely dependent on what they put in.

I think for sites like Facebook, it attracts people who are quick to be critical of anything. That is not a judgement, just an observation… probably an early-adopter trait. No rain, no rainbows, right? Personally, I don’t care one way or the other about Facebook as I only have 51 friends there and maintain a profile because I need to have Fan Pages and people expect me to have a FB presence being in the computer world. If I didn’t have to, I wouldn’t. Wonder how many of the “neutrals” got counted as “negatives.”

For a fair number of users, Facebook has become a necessary evil. They’ll keep using the site because there’s no alternative, but they’re going to be disgruntled the entire time. It’s like having a family reunion in the boondocks. People will go because that’s where the gathering is, but it doesn’t mean they’ll like it.

I can’t get no satisfaction,
I can’t get no satisfaction.
‘Cause I try and I try and I try and I try.
I can’t get no, I can’t get no.

And what does it say that Facebook et al continue to growth at earth-shattering speed despite the fact they can’t satisfy their customer?

Re: your point “If all my friends left Facebook I would have no reason to visit the site ever again.”…

Therein lies the problem.

Your friends will never leave Facebook. At least not until say 1, 20, 30, 75 or more leave.

It’s akin to complaining about the price of ticket prices in sports. Owners and teams won’t give a damn about your complaints until you stop showing up.

Mark Z won’t give a damn until you stop Facebooking.

Phil Gerb is on to something, I think, in his twitter response to you. We define satisfaction as “what you get plus what you expect,” so websites with higher expectations often do have lower satisfaction. That could very well be what’s going on with Facebook, but I would think Google has pretty high expectations, butr they also have a really high score (even though they slipped this year, they are still high).

We think the opposite may be at play with FoxNews.com’s very high score this year…our research uncovered some signs that their readers could have lower expectations (for example, they rely on fewer news sources than the typical online news reader, which could lead to lower expectations). That could be why they have such high expectations.

As for whether satisfaction really matters, I guess we would argue that because of this link between satisfaction and stock prices, it does, except in the case of a monopoly or near-monopoly (like a cable company, electric utility, who may be the only provider of services in a given area.) What’s your take on whether FB is a monopoly or near-monopoly? We had some discussion about that internally.

Finally, while ACSI doesn’t give out their questions, they do share their methodology: http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=48&Itemid=41 Does that help at all?

To answer Melissa’s question above, the people polled were a representative US sample. While older people are definitely less satisfied with Facebook and younger people more satisfied, they were all within a range of pretty low scores. In terms of what people say they like least, you’re right on about the changes. Check out this word cloud about what people said they liked least in this study: http://www.freedyourmind.com/freed_your_mind/2010/07/the-best-and-worst-of-facebook.html