?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
21 March 2008 @ 10:43 am
Censor deez.  
Regarding the boycott, strike, whatever the hell you want to call it, I'm not participating, obviously. However, I did take a small step in regards to the reported censorship of the Interests search feature, where "adult content" interests are apparently no longer searchable.

To my interests, I have added three items:

  • Sex

  • Bondage

  • Anything people censor



This represents the entirety of my protest placard. Thank you.
 
 
Current Mood: rousing of rabble
 
 
 
bronxelf_ag001 on March 21st, 2008 03:57 pm (UTC)
and supposedly, they reverted back to whatever the old search criteria were three days ago.
Traveler Farlandertwfarlan on March 21st, 2008 04:23 pm (UTC)
So in other words, the immediate questioning of that action was enough. The days of bitching that followed... needless.

This of course says to me that today's boycott/tantrum is even more pointless than I had already thought.
bronxelf_ag001 on March 21st, 2008 04:29 pm (UTC)
Well people want to continue to rail on against the conspiracy. They claim it's the principle of the thing. But it's not, really.

See, what it's being used for is to say "but they could make all the *current* basic accounts plus accounts in the future and not give us any warning!

Aside from the big "so fucking what" of that, they could have done that IN THE FIRST DAMNED PLACE and they didn't. So what's the bitching about?
Traveler Farlandertwfarlan on March 21st, 2008 04:41 pm (UTC)
If the bitchers want to argue that this is an issue of failure to communicate a change when SUP had previously stated they would be posting changes for discussion in advance notice of the proposed change date, then yes, that's a fair point. It's such a good point that SUP already backed up and said, "You're right, we broke our own policy here and we're backing off, discussing possible ways to make it where existing users can go on making ad-free accounts." So hey, good on those who made this point.

For those who just want something for absolutely nothing as compared to nearly nothing (ads), may I offer a hearty, "Bite me," and the suggestion to go elsewhere with the oh so precious content these freeloaders provide. Oh, but wait, as many people have mentioned, none of the available alternatives allow new accounts that are ad-free, either. Hmm.
bronxelf_ag001 on March 21st, 2008 04:45 pm (UTC)
this is a straight c/p from a comment I made about this this morning:

I mentioned in a friend's lj yesterday that what this seems to come down to is the fallacy that quantity, by virtue of itself, creates greater quality.

The logic, if you can call it that, is that there are far more free users than paid, so most of the content is created by those users. They believe that content is like coin- a fair trade for the very thing that keeps LJ functioning, and by removing the ad-free basic service, they are not being traded with fairly for their "coin" (that being their content.)

The flaws in this logic are large enough to drive a train through, but let's go with the most obvious ones-

On it's face, it would seem that there might be something to this, strictly based on odds. It's sort of like shooting darts in the dark- if you shoot 500 darts, it is more likely that 3 will hit the target than if you only shoot 5. However this makes the utterly ridiculous assumption that all content is inherently created equal, and further, (and here's where it *really* goes off the rails) that the people posting the best content *are also basic account holders*. Though "good" is clearly a subjective call in terms of content, those who have a very serious investment in their content and continue to regularly produce it (as opposed to the vast majority of LJ users, who are *not* using LJ as a blog the way we do at wordpress or blogger) are *not* using basic accounts, but are heavily skewed in favor of paid or permanent accounts.

They also are under the delusion that their "content" by virtue of their simply being more of it, makes them inherently more valuable because of the viral nature of the net. This MIGHT have been true ten years ago. It is absolutely not true now, and probably hasn't been true since LJ did away with invite codes (I needed an invite code to get my lj too.)

They believe that they are *owed* the basic/ad free account because they've been supporting LJ with their very presence and content all these years. Well the complete arrogance of that aside, I would remind them that currency fluctuates. The volume of content/presence by basic users is no longer *WORTH* what it once was, just like the dollar is worth less against the pound today than it was yesterday (I assume-I haven't checked this morning.) I look at it more like a pay as you go thing- you paid with content, and you got ad-free basic. The irony is these same people *STILL* have ad-free basic (though I wouldn't blame SUP for one moment if they removed that too after all this)- They just can't get another account at that level.

The reason why *THIS* outcry has become so divisive is because for the first time it is pitting one section of the userbase against another, and the one doing the complaining is arguing from a position of more people=more important vs. the people who are paying for the service=the ones who are allowing all those other people to basically be here in the first place. The arrogance of the position that their *free* content is *inherently more valuable* because there is more of it is pissing off a whole lot of people who at this point, would be perfectly happy if the folks who were so up in arms deleted their accounts permanently.

Of course they won't, because as you have noted, there's *no other* service that is similar to the LJ opensource model that is offering the free/no ads thing either.
Traveler Farlandertwfarlan on March 21st, 2008 05:40 pm (UTC)
For every person bitching about this whole thing who also does not have a paid account and never has had one*, who has said that they will take their content and go home and then oh then won't WE be sorry?

Show me.

If a person who decries this move has not ever had a paid account or donated or done anything like that, even receiving paid account time as a gift (not coincidentally the only way you know someone values your content enough to consider it worth paying for), and claims that LJ would be poorer without their content, does not make good on the threat to go away, then ... well, I probably wasn't listening to that person, anyway, to be quite honest. That person should, right away, right now, delete his or her LJ account and go elsewhere. Show me that we're so much worse off without that precious content. Come back in a year and ask me if I ever noticed the lack.

* Those who have previously had paid accounts and let them lapse because they did not want to support the business model are doing exactly what they ought: voting with their dollars. I have no problem with that; this is a person who pulled his or her own weight on the server/bandwidth equation and has decided not to contribute to/support the company any longer.
Hyrkanianhyrkanian on March 21st, 2008 05:48 pm (UTC)
I have yet to decide whether I will renew my paid account. I have until July something to decide. But I am heartily glad that I didn't buy a permanent account, because now I can actually make a statement should I decide to stop paying or go elsewhere. The chances of me buying a "permanent" anything in future are much reduced as well.
Traveler Farlandertwfarlan on March 21st, 2008 05:57 pm (UTC)
Considering that the new owners are not truly obligated to respect "permanent" account status, there's no serious advantage to it when dealing with a property that can be sold at any time, as LJ has come to be.
Hyrkanianhyrkanian on March 21st, 2008 06:04 pm (UTC)
Ah, good point.
Traveler Farlandertwfarlan on March 21st, 2008 06:14 pm (UTC)
It wasn't one I'd really considered until I tried in response to your comment to articulate what advantage a permanent account would convey. Thinking about it, I honestly can't see that there's any advantage over regular paid accounts, which at least do you provide you with a less-galling way "out" if things were to become untenable here.