|
Post by Katty on Apr 7, 2009 2:29:19 GMT 10
I'm not saying that at all. I'm merely pointing out that people joining the site should be aware of all the risks involved in switching to a fledgling business.
Fair enough. But my father is the managing director of a large multi-national investment bank - I definitely don't think there is anything wrong with supporting a large corporation. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on this point.
My issue is that they are relying on ONE source of revenue, with no back up plan if that fails. The business climate is one of risk at the momemt, no matter what industry you work in. I don't believe they should be closing off doors so early in the game. They're restricting their ability to adapt to a changing business climate, which is, quite frankly, idiotic.
|
|
lhazel
Rider Trainee
Posts: 67
|
Post by lhazel on Apr 7, 2009 2:53:32 GMT 10
Dreamwidth is actually making pains to improve the service - something that discouraged me from joining IJ (which didn't improve said service and has a hinky theme to boot), since I never thought LJ was acting particularly badly, just ... Corporate. Especially since they'd had a "we can delete anyone at any time for any reason" clause in their TOS since time immemorial. I left over the advertising thing, actually. The deletions, I was not happy with, but that was mainly the behavior of the outside organization that approached them. "Corporate" doesn't interest me. I will never be able to hear "queer people are bad for business" and respond with "please, allow me to give you a bunch of money for pixel privileges." I do like the Dreamwidth interface quite a lot, and fan-run websites have always been better for fandom than ordinary ones. I don't know that they'll turn much of a profit, but LJ started as a code-monkey's experiment and flourished for quite some time before bottom-line became the foremost concern. As a fan, I'm interested in where my friends will be. as most of my friends don't read my current journal, even one or two people relocating is a net gain.
|
|
|
Post by boosette on Apr 7, 2009 4:01:51 GMT 10
It does seem a very fundamental difference of opinion, and I'm very glad to call an agree-to-disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Apr 8, 2009 13:10:07 GMT 10
Understandably... but on the other hand, some of us bought permanent accounts before they were actually deleting accounts.
And was it an anti-queer movement, or a too-aggressive approach to banning pornography and pedophilia? It's probably a po-tay-to vs. po-tah-to kind of distinction, or at least a slippery slope fallacy - but I would consider one a bad policy taken too far, leading to harming people - while if it were a pogram specifically against queer culture I would have taken my toys and gone home.
|
|
fissijo
Queen's Rider
randomly predictable
Posts: 551
|
Post by fissijo on Apr 10, 2009 19:18:36 GMT 10
I don't know yet, first I had heard of it was a friend on LJ posting about how she will be getting one (why yes, I DO live under a rock). I like my LJ, I'm comfortable there and I've made some great friends through it so unless they all jump ship I don't think I'm planning on leaving anytime soon...
Saying that I might do the cross posting thing...
I really do not know!
|
|
lhazel
Rider Trainee
Posts: 67
|
Post by lhazel on Apr 13, 2009 21:31:12 GMT 10
And was it an anti-queer movement, or a too-aggressive approach to banning pornography and pedophilia? It's probably a po-tay-to vs. po-tah-to kind of distinction, or at least a slippery slope fallacy - but I would consider one a bad policy taken too far, leading to harming people - while if it were a pogrom specifically against queer culture I would have taken my toys and gone home. See, that's why I wrote "bad for business." I do not particularly care whether their homophobia is passive or active, I really don't give a rat's ass. If they're against me I don't care what the reason is and I am done lying down to make it easier for people to step on my neck. As soon as a company is saying so blatantly, "I do not want people like you to be my customers" I'm only too happy to oblige.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Apr 14, 2009 9:47:58 GMT 10
Yes, but you also implied that their intent was to say "queer people are bad for business" - and I was questioning if that was what they were saying, or if it was a search-for-pornaography-and-pedophilia gone wrong rather than them saying "queer people are bad for business". I totaly understand how it was interpreted by customers and why - I'm questioning whether it was there *intent* to alienate people or not. It's wrong, either way - I'm well aware of that. I just like to have the whole picture.
|
|
lhazel
Rider Trainee
Posts: 67
|
Post by lhazel on Apr 14, 2009 18:37:03 GMT 10
The deletion of interests like "queer" from the top-100 list has something to do with pedophilia? You are being awfully generous.
|
|
|
Post by Lisa on Apr 15, 2009 12:47:55 GMT 10
I wasn't aware of it* - I just knew that initially they were stating that they were going after pornography and pedophilia. This is why I was asking if it was an intentional anti-queer movement. Learning about this makes me agree that it was - at least in part.
*I'm actually surprised that I never saw more of it, considering that I have "gay rights" and "gay fiction" as LJ interests
|
|
|
Post by chocolatefridays on Apr 17, 2009 9:32:33 GMT 10
Ehh, maybe. I use lj because of all the people throughout the years... if they all switched, I would too, but I don't think they're planning on it.
|
|
Wild
Page
Crazy Canuck
Posts: 291
|
Post by Wild on Apr 18, 2009 12:36:32 GMT 10
I'll be keeping my LJ since I got my paid account fix and I'm happy with LJ. I never had any trouble with the site at all. But I'll be getting a DW too and it'll basically mirror the content that I have in my LJ minus the glorious amount of userpics I have.
|
|