?

Log in

Memo to the new LJAB Member - LJ United -- Standing Up For LiveJournal's Future! [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
LJ United -- Standing Up For LiveJournal's Future!

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Memo to the new LJAB Member [May. 31st, 2008|10:10 pm]
LJ United -- Standing Up For LiveJournal's Future!

ljunited

[eruditeviking]
[Current Mood |hopefulhopeful]

Earlier today I posted the following message to our newly elected Live Journal Advisory Board member. I have not yet gotten a response back from her, but I am hoping that she may chose to either join our group or at the very least create a forum where we can express our goals and ideas to her for consideration by the board. I will update the group as soon as I have a response and some time to post it.




To legomymalfoy

Since you've won, would it be feasible to ask you to create a place where we can interact with you in a more accessible way? Perhaps a community dedicated to your role as a live journal advisory board member? I was hoping to have a forum where we could bring issues that we wish to have addressed by LJ via our representative.

You may also wish to consider talking to insomnia over at the community ljunited since our group is dedicated to user base oriented goals.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 04:04 pm (UTC)
I left a message to LMM last week, encouraging them to do an interview in our community to address their POV regarding our platform, to address issues, etc.

No response yet, though.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-01 05:30 pm (UTC)
Responses from her are painfully slow for anyone not on her friends list from what I can tell.

Side Note: A number of our issues were at least partly dealt with by the new policy changes, and I was wondering if you wanted to go over them and make a post regarding those changes and propose the necessary updates to our charter goals.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 07:12 pm (UTC)
I don't think the new changes necessitate changing our goals, as those should be constant.

Judging from the changes, I see some real possibilities that their policy changes might actually lead to further restrictions against users.

They have, for example, indicated that they are actually expanding the definition of what is hate speech. But what if that's not really hate speech, per se, but parody, comedy, etc? What if it's the LJ equivalent of ginger kids? Or what about the example recently of a LJ user in Russia who faces imprisonment for suggesting that corrupt police be publically burned in town squares? Clearly, that's hate speech now too under these new definitions, even though it only focuses against corrupt cops -- criminals, essentially -- and not against any racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual orientation, as any true hate speech legislation would ordinarily be limited by. And again, no limits as to context.

"(Insert politician / dictator) should die." Hate speech?!

Likewise, they have called for researching and possibly taking actions against behavior that may cause self-harm. Cutting... pro-ana... but what about fiction vs. reality? What guarantees will be in place to protect BDSM or numerous unsafe sexual practices? Discussion of drug use -- real or fictional.

So, while you may see improvements, I see a real risk that they are backing away slightly on a few issues that got them into trouble, while actively threatening rights on several new fronts.

If you want to make a post about the changes at this time, please feel free to do so. The real issue is what should happen -- and what we should do -- if they get these changes wrong.

Edited at 2008-06-01 07:13 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-02 01:51 am (UTC)
There was a reason I stated "partly", I see some slippery slope on a few of them, but a few issues were resolved to some satisfaction at least regarding the human breast. It's why I think we should post them up and go over them with more chance of getting some discussion about them here rather than just on the News post where it's to cluttered to follow much.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-02 05:18 am (UTC)
Yeah, probably a good idea, at least to open it to discussion.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-01 05:28 pm (UTC)
It's funny how only a certain cabal of people assume we're some power grab organization setting about to make insomnia King of all of El Jay Land. Seriously, you need to get off your high horse and get a clue for a change because it's getting dull to listen to.

This group existed before the nominations, we didn't nominate any of our own members, and we still exist after the election. I realize nothing I say is going to make you change your mind, but at this point I don't really care. I'm just curious as to why you're bothering to hang around if you think we're only here for that purpose, which as you point out "failed". You don't believe in our goals, you've made that painfully obvious.

I'm well aware of you foray into legalese, and I can easily surmise where you are going with this line of thought. I just don't agree with you, and I surmise that neither will a court of law should it be taken so far.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squnq
2008-06-01 05:37 pm (UTC)
It always amuses me how people's immediate reaction to contrary opinions of a community or journal is to go "well why are you here if you don't like it".

Anyways, the promises made by LJ back in the day were made by Livejournal when it was a separate entity and became invalid when it was purchased by another company (and another). No representative, rm or otherwise, was going to have any ability or influence to restore the creation of new basic accounts and the like. The current advisory board member, however, is so distant from the community that pretty much all organizations and communities on LJ which had their own agenda should be able to agree that the outcome was far from optimal.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-01 05:44 pm (UTC)
Generally I don't object to people with contrary opinions, however I do object to people spreading rumors and lies about the function and purpose of the community as a whole.

People over at Liberal (another community I'm part of) have Conservatives and that's fine. The conservatives don't go running off to say that we're secretly allied with the Nazis to bring Hitler back to life. Cambler has consistently been part of the cabal that is suggesting that this group is a sham or puppet whose purpose is covert and I rather object to that concept.

Now as to your own concerns, I understand your point of view, and I can't fault you on your logic regarding the situation. However that doesn't mean we don't keep trying to improve the situation as best we are able given the tools at our disposal.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: squnq
2008-06-01 05:48 pm (UTC)
However that doesn't mean we don't keep trying to improve the situation as best we are able given the tools at our disposal.

That's the logic shared by cambler, myself and many others - a lot of us just believe that improving the situation cannot be accomplished through typical diplomacy is all. You can't communicate with a wall.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 07:44 pm (UTC)
It wasn't exactly our goal to solely rely on typical diplomacy... only to give such matters a chance first.

Part of our goal was to create real unanimity amongst the advisory board. Lots of them are pretty good, honest people who we could potentially win to our side, *IF* we present them with strong evidence. Right now, they don't even know about most of these issues, however.

Likewise, the new exec at SUP comes from a background where she *might* be more amenable to change than prior SUP execs.

So, yeah... we thought it would be a start to at least bring these "experts" up-to-speed on what issues LJ is actually facing, because if you think that they all know how the current management is violating the culture of LJ, or even know that LJ is shrinking, and that increased commercialization is actually increasing the rate of decline, well... you don't know how ignorantly uninformed such businesses can be.

What is needed isn't diplomacy or the ability to mobilize people to complain, take action, or walk. What's needed -- as much as possible -- is the ability to do all of the above, perhaps all at once. To do that, you need some degree of unity, and yes, to obtain that, you need to be willing to try more than just one method to deal with the problem.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: m03m
2008-06-03 12:23 pm (UTC)
the new exec at SUP comes from a background where she *might* be more amenable to change than prior SUP execs.

Hmm! It seems she is Dutch. This can only be a Good Thing. At least, we can hope!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 07:56 pm (UTC)
To say that the promises became invalid after acquisition misses the point.

The promises were either never legally binding at all, or , if they were, then they would've *STILL* been binding after acquisition, just like any business agreement / contract could still be considered legally binding after acquisition. The question is whether promises explicitly made to customers must be honored. Some courts would say yes, unless you first changed those promises, which you could probably do at will, given LJ's TOS.

In any event, they are only binding if you have a good lawyer and you're willing to take it to court.

To me, the promise *does* matter, because that is our culture that was violated when those promises were ignored. To the extent that they choose to violate our culture repeatedly, they do so at a real cost to their business, and to their customer loyalty.

" No representative, rm or otherwise, was going to have any ability or influence to restore the creation of new basic accounts and the like."

Certainly, no representative without a large, unified group behind them would be capable of leveraging the kind of influence needed to restore basic accounts, etc.

You need a carrot *AND* a stick to even have a chance. And Jameth had neither.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 07:31 pm (UTC)
And what great, transparent motives would these be?!

Show me the transparency! Any thing you want to make up, I would guess. Just read the tea leaves any way you want!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 07:29 pm (UTC)
Cambler, you're full of it.

If I wanted power, I would've entered the race myself. Except, of course, you and I both know that the position in question doesn't *HAVE* any power that the members of LJ do not give it. It's only as powerful as that person's ability to influence the management's decisions, end of story.

What I *did* want was qualified, credible candidates who actually took a solid policy on the issues.

Yes, we tried to get rm elected, and thought that she would've been a very good candidate, especially for people who wanted to unite around a solid stand that it's wrong to violate any LJer's rights. No, we didn't endorse you. And yet you whined so, and threw your lot in with a bunch of dramatis personae, rather than people who were openly serious about people's rights. And now you're playing the blame game.

Well, look in the mirror. After all, you were a candidate.

I have serious reservations about LMM as well, and I think that, as I've commented above, that these new changes aren't necessarily for the better at all. But what's been your answer all throughout this process, other than cynicism and division?!

Really, you want openness here for your POV, but all you do is crap all over what we're trying to accomplish.

Edited at 2008-06-01 07:48 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-01 08:48 pm (UTC)

Just a quick question

And I didnt want to make a separate post on it..

Is there a way to mass transition an existing lj blog off this server to one of the sister sites if things decide to get dicey?

I've got two paid accounts with alot of work put into them, if things get stupid, I dont want to have to abandon them and copy-paste moving would take a LONG time.

(In other words..in order to have an effective union, you have to have people that cant be threatened with deletion, or have their blogs treated as "leverage".)

I agree with diplomacy first..but I like to be prepared for big stick wielding.

Thanks

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: matgb
2008-06-01 09:36 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

Yes, liz_marcs has posted on it extensively (check her tags) and a bunch of other meta comms have many guidelines on it (google is your friend).

Personally I back up to a Wordpress install as I can keep my comments that way.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-02 10:16 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

~chuckles~

I'm gonna have to google the defination of meta comm first lol.

But thanks I'll check it out.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-01 10:22 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

There are ways of exporting them entirely, yes. It's still a pain in the ass, though.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-02 10:18 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

Worse than copy pasting individually?

~cringes~
Guess I better go check the suggestions though lol.
Thanks
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-02 11:09 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

No... not worse than copy pasting individually, but still, the initial work involved is more than I want to deal with. But then again, my journal is pretty old and voluminous, so...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-02 04:56 am (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

You might want to ask imc if anyone is working on such an idea. There's a whole crew of very techno-savvy people on LJ who love developing these kind of programs.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-02 10:14 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

hmm. kk.

Thanks
:)

Edited at 2008-06-02 10:18 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: m03m
2008-06-02 12:35 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

Is there a way to mass transition an existing lj blog off this server to one of the sister sites if things decide to get dicey?

I use LJ Sec to repost all of my journal to Scribbld.net. It doesn't copy tags, comments or specific user pics. But the postings, privacy settings and the posting data transfer well.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-02 10:13 pm (UTC)

Re: Just a quick question

~nods~

I'll check it out....Ive got one where I'd really like the tags to transfer and another, the comments....but thanks for the suggestion.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: queerbychoice
2008-06-01 09:07 pm (UTC)
"Really, you want openness here for your POV, but all you do is crap all over what we're trying to accomplish."

Agreed, so how about banning cambler?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: kaifoxx
2008-06-02 10:08 pm (UTC)
I second the banning of cambler.

He's just going to disrupt the community and insinuate crap that's not true about Imsomnia. (insinuate, cause he has no actual proof, and what evidence he might have, if any, is open to interpretation at best.)

And now he's on this kick where he's gonna try to convince the rest of the community that "everyone else" agrees with him. That's PROPAGANDA and those "everyone else"s if any, might number 3 or 4, and most likely are the same individuals who started the bash fest in Cambler's blog comments.

It's pointless to argue with him, and he's just gonna waste everyone's time while he takes the opportunity to attack Insomnia.

In fact...I'll go ahead and pre-empt him on it, his next move would likely have been to accuse Insomnia of putting ME up to this post.
Not hardly. Cambler is just THAT unoriginal in his deceptive tactics.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: insomnia
2008-06-02 11:13 pm (UTC)
"And now he's on this kick where he's gonna try to convince the rest of the community that "everyone else" agrees with him."

He's convincingly unconvincing.

Parallels nicely with the Clinton campaign!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: m03m
2008-06-02 03:22 pm (UTC)
After a little research, it's clear you only had your own interests involved.
And pray tell, what would those be?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2008-06-04 03:43 am (UTC)
Did she ever respond?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: eruditeviking
2008-06-04 12:36 pm (UTC)
No, she has not.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: randomposting
2008-06-04 06:10 pm (UTC)
Let me feign surprise.

:(
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: m03m
2008-06-05 06:26 am (UTC)
*Everything* in her blog is flocked now. Even the 'Election post' that was public before, although comments were screened.
The silence is deafening.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: adameros
2008-07-23 07:38 pm (UTC)
I am hosting an unofficial referendum vote on legomymalfoy's accessibility and performance.

Please vote.

http://adameros.livejournal.com/2599937.html

Also, please have your friends vote.

[Edit: I said "official" as opposed to "unofficial" by mistake.]

Edited at 2008-07-23 07:41 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Thread)