rant: what's the point of being here?

[mellowtigger]

I just typed up a reply to a public post, and then LiveJournal informed me that the user has set their journal to Friends-Only posting.  (Why couldn't I have been warned when I clicked the Reply button before I spent the time writing up the note?!)  I may have to make a new review of my subscription list ("friends") and start removing names that are primarily non-public.  I've tried to avoid adding names that do this kind of stuff, but everyone is compartmentalizing their lives so much that I consider the practice far beyond a reasonable tactic any more.

Most of the accounts I've subscribed to are queer folk, and they of all people should know how poisonous it is to sequester a part of your life into safe closet territory.

I understand wanting to make a Friends-read-only post every once in a while, to discuss something potentially illegal or otherwise harmful.  But must EVERYthing that some people write fall into this category?  Thought #1: You really need to consider moving to email if you want to eliminate every aspect of webpages that risks disclosure of some super-secret information that would ruin your life or someone else's.  Thought #2: Maybe you shouldn't be posting stuff like that anyway, if it's really so dangerous for someone else to read.  Consider reorienting your life to spend more time on productive and explorational topics instead of secretive harmful things.

I expect people to correct me if I state something that's WRONG.  If the rest of the community is really so delicate that they don't want public commentary, then perhaps a static webpage would be better (or, again, consider email).  It really undermines the learning opportunity of a social site to retreat into these little corners, disallowing public reading, disallowing public commenting.  I have all anonymous posts screened on my journal, but I approve all the ones that seem like legitimate users (instead of spam attempts).

If what you post here could ruin your job, then attend to your livelihood and stop posting stuff that could threaten it!  If what you post here could ruin your friendships, then attend to them and stop posting stuff that could threaten them!

I'm very disappointed in the LJ population ("community" would require use of quotes) at the moment.  I want to live as a whole person in a whole world.  I don't want to live in a world that's segmented, compartmentalized, and ghettoized.  So grow some gonads and own up to the kind of world that you're actively creating.  Which kind of world will you be a part of?

LiveJournal deserves writers who make public posts that are searchable by web crawlers like Google, so surfers can find other people with opinions and information on topics that concern them.  LiveJournal deserves writers who open their posts to everyone, so that subscribers have an opportunity to read followup opinions by other subscribers.  You never know who you'll meet online... but locking posts down is a way to ensure that people don't meet each other at all.

Comments

[fingertrouble.livejournal.com]

I used to be like that - yes my life is open, free etc. and still is.

What made me re-evaluate on LJ was a anonymous veiled death threat, not direct but enough to be worrying - I was being critical of religion inc Islam, yet wishing me to be stoned, however passionate your faith, is not on. So I disabled anon comments.

And recently been flamed out by someone who can't be bothered to even click on a few links and see who it was posting and that I might actually know what I'm talking about, the endless trickle of racist and homophobic comments on my YouTube videos, random pedants picking on Twitter comments not related to them as if it was a personal affront and starting arguments...well recently it's gotten worse, but 13 years of this and I'm starting to wonder whether I should either shut down everything or at least go friends only. Being open does not mean any passing idiot can take a pop, you know?

So as slightly annoying as it can be, friends only I understand. I've had friends who were stalked or had abusive stuff and ID theft, so it's slightly more than people bitching in private.

If people acted as a community in the first place, and thought before writing (or responding) rather than actually being lazy pedants who really don't care and want to troll for a fight - well then blocking, friends-only and protected wouldn't be needed. Blaming the solution (and victims) for it is a bit rich - sadly there are idiots out there, and social media seems to make them think they have the right to make you feel bad.

Nope, that's not what the Internet was supposed to be about.

So if I go friends only in future I'll be sad to see you go as I like to read you as a friend, but understand I've spent years doing my 'public good' and have too many scars as a result. I've deserved my hermitage.

"So grow some gonads"

[artfldarknbuzzd.livejournal.com]

Personally, my journal is just that.
A personal journal.
It's not an open community forum
or a discussion message board.
And I write mainly for myself.

The option of having a public, friend's only
or a completely private journal is lovely.
There are a variety of reasons someone
would post only private entries.
And I suppose each one is as unique
as the individual him-or herself.

Diversity.

My art work is public and
is on display thru various web-availables
and can certainly be "googled".
But my journal is shared only
by those I choose to share it with.

Sorry you've decided to remove
'non-public' journals from your list,
but that, too is a choice..

Good luck to you.

Namaste.

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

I see your point - but do you know what I think is even worse?

People who default their journals to screen comments by their "friends"! I can see doing that for specific purposes on a specific post - but as a general policy? It simply reeks of Control Freak, is an indicator that someone "friends" people willy-nilly - or both, weirdly enough.

Most of my postings are public; aside from a very few troublemakers and assholes I've specifically banned from my journal, everyone with an identity can comment - I have blocked anonymous comments.

screening comments by "friends"

[khrysso.livejournal.com]

In possible defense of those who screen comments by friends, I would beg consideration of the caveat, "Don't attribute to malice that which could be explained just as easily by incompetence." I am not a newbie on LJ, but nor am I such an old hand that I don't flub up and commit exactly the kind of offense of which you complain. Sometimes LJ tells me to unscreen a comment and I'm all like, "Unscreen? How did that get screened? He's a friend of mine—I didn't ask it to do that! And how the hell do I unscreen this, anyway?" And then I have to dig for whatever default I didn't address somewhere along the line, and sometimes I don't find it right away...

Re: screening comments by "friends"

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

In the cases that I'm thinking of, the journal owner confirmed it was intentional. Now, to me - if someone has "friend" status who's proven to be unworthy of it, the (to me) obvious response is to "unfriend" that person (and perhaps even go so far as to ban them from posting comments), rather than afflict and annoy the people on one's list that one DOES trust.

Re: screening comments by "friends"

[khrysso.livejournal.com]

Yikes! Definitely!

[dodecadragon.livejournal.com]

The reason I have mostly friend's only post is pretty much the reason that timbearcub mentioned. I'm just not interested in being assaulted by some snot-nosed punk, radical fanatic, or what-have-you who have nothing better or productive to say about anything.

That's one of the issues that burned me out on LJ before when I was "loganbeary" on here.

I can't afford to have some random flame warrior knocking me off balance.

But, I'm a firm believer that people feel free to associate (or not) with others on their own terms. I state as much in my profile.

[fingertrouble.livejournal.com]

Oh and:

"LiveJournal deserves writers who make public posts that are searchable by web crawlers like Google"

As a paid up member of LJ - an anon donation, but I was paid up a year before that - I am not LJ's advertiser. I have paid for this site, and if I choose to make something that might help them bring people in friends-only, it's my choice.

I'm here to write and speak with like-minded people, not as a Google linkjuice bot! The people who search around the issues I know about will possibly find me, but not the posts I make friends...too personal. I don't like my personal stuff being open to the world if I'm talking about others - I don't say anything hurtful, or anything they'd have a problem me discussing with friends, but without their explicit consent I don't want to publicise it into a global thing.

It's just politeness.

[bearbarry.livejournal.com]

I am a teacher, and I have to be more cautious than the average person on here because I can't risk one of my students finding my journal, copying something that I thought was harmless at the time, and using it against me. I probably would have more friends if I had the freedom to be more open, but it is a trade off, and the risk that something might be used against me outweighs the desire to be able to post 100% public. Since I know that only those whom I have friended will read what I write, then I can be more open than I would be otherwise. Hugz!

[khrysso.livejournal.com]

Based on what you've said here, I'm apparently of a similar mind to yours: I decided quite a while ago to follow a let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may policy. I don't go out of my way to invite sensitive types or detractors into my circle, but I also tend to choose venues that don't draw them unless they go out of their way to find them.

That said, your rant does strike me as pretty edgy, as in on the edge of being of sounding... doctrinaire?... in a sense, perhaps as extreme as the extremists who make their entire LJ journals impenetrable to all who lack membership in the exclusive club. Not that I'm complaining—I'm just sayin'.

I definitely share the experience of feeling irritated when I try to post a reply only to find after the fact that it had been an exercise in futility.

[mellowtigger]

Yes, telling people what they should be doing with their lives is dangerous business.

But when people are given tools that could be used to change the world, and instead they use them to pad their cozy nests... it annoys me in a really massive way.

I'm still pondering what to do about it.

[dodecadragon.livejournal.com]

It seems to me like the main trigger to this post was expending time and energy into writing a comment/post only to learn you weren't allowed to by the owner of that LJ.

I agree 100% that some kind of notification should happen when you click on a "comment" or "reply" link, or better yet, the option shouldn't even appear unless you're allowed.

Seems like it should be a fairly easy fix to do. For example: When people disable commenting on a post because they want to convey a message, but don't necessarily want to discuss it. You don't even see a comment or reply link to click on. Why not tie this feature in with the friends filter feature? If you're not allowed to comment, there wouldn't even be a link to comment with. Therefore you don't waste your time and energy on writing something that won't be posted.

[foeclan.livejournal.com]

I use it mainly to keep up with friends and acquaintances. I bumped my entries to friends-only recently because I was friended by someone whose journal appears to be primarily devoted to harassing people for being furries.

[dangerdhotrod.livejournal.com]

I totally think you've got a good point.

I made all posts while I was a Peace Corps Volunteer because that org has a history of giving bloggers who work for them shit because of the political nature of the job. i.e. host country nationals finding posts from people in the their country and taking it the wrong way.

or also volunteers just bitching and blowing off steam saying things that later make the whole post look kind of bad.

but in the end i think people should be able to say what they want to all the time and nobody should lose their job or suffer huge consequences because we should be able to have an open forum without fear on any topic.

but because i did want to stay and i did want to blog i just made all posts friends only and figured i'd make them all public when i was done with the job. but livejournal's interface doesn't make it easy to edit the security of posts.

also i've gotten in the habit of making things friends only so now i tend to.

it's like if i'm thinking general thoughts i make it public and if it's more a 'journal-y' kind of thing i make it friends only.

in the end i see both sides. some people do have to worry about what other people think (like the teacher above who risks losing their job from public posts on personal life), and some people just don't want to deal with the hassle of trolls. there's so many people these days it seems who don't really want to discuss things they just want to be right, and it's not really fun talking to them.

anyway i hope you don't unfriend me because i enjoy reading your posts.

[ogam.livejournal.com]

(http://mellowtigger.livejournal.com/profile)Mellow Tigger (http://mellowtigger.livejournal.com),

I too am taken aback by your experience ... friends-only replies to a public post? WTF?

I am someone with a Permanent Account whose LJ is mostly Friends-Only. I consider my LJ much like a dinner party of my friends: any discussions there are not for public consumption. I'm sorry if that disappoints you because I value your good company and would not like to lose the connection with you here on LJ.

[kroyd.livejournal.com]

I'll have to double check my settings. I want you to be able to comment on my journal.

All I can say

[arkanjil.livejournal.com]

is that it takes all kinds, really.

Well, that and also, I can see certain stalkeresque scenarios where friends only filtering would be a good thing. For my part tho, I rarely filter these days, and I don't tolerate much filtering from others without a reason

One Side of The Story

[walterwz.livejournal.com]

First I ascribe to the basic philosophy that people can do what ever they please. If it does not please me then I don't have to deal with them. I was disturbed when I read in a number of places that employers go to the online journals of employees. This bothered me. It bothered me in the same way that my previous employer required that I sign a document stating that every idea I had even down to how to use toilet paper belonged to them.

I filter some posts. There are some discussions that I prefer not to share with other people. Filtering all posts and filtering none is not a comfortable way to go.

I don't think people appreciate the public and published nature of this medium.

I heard an interesting thing this weekend on the Philadelphia Convention that gave us the US Constitution. The proceedings were kept secret so everyone would speak freely and openly. Usually I don't think secret government is a good thing. Here again all or none is the bad thing.

[bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com]

So what's the answer to my conundrum, which is that there is content on my journal that some readers specifically want to avoid?

[mellowtigger]

I posted my tagging system suggestion to the LiveJournal suggestion community. They didn't take to it.

That means the workaround is to create sub-lists within your own Friends-list and post notes only to them. I've worked with these "Custom Groups" only as a test, but they seem like a lot of work to setup and maintain.

[bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com]

Yup, that's what I do.


I wish there were a was to give people access to a sub-list without having to "friend" them first. That is the most irritating feature of all LJ, to me.