Proposed LJ Strike

[talktooloose]

There is a proposed 24-hour content strike called for this Friday from midnight to midnight GMT wherein we are asked not to post or comment.

I'm still not clear where the strike call initiated but the main issue is about the fact that there will be no new free accounts. It is also about the way in which LJ implemented this decision. Here is a summary of the issues:

• It's about free and ad-free LiveJournal accounts being abolished for new members, ignoring the advice from the newly-formed Advisory Board.
  
• It's about LJ staff trying to sneak this decision in under the radar, and when people found out, telling the users it was done 'to make the signup process less confusing'.
  
• It's about LJ staff failing to apologize for trying to hide the facts from view and for lying about the actual reasons for their actions.

There is one more issue that seems to have been as mysteriously resolved as it was created. Here is the item struckthrough with commentary:

• And finally, it's about the latest decision to hide certain user interests from the list of Most Popular Interests, some of them being fanfiction, bisexuality, sex and depression. This decision was not announced or explained in any way. Users found out for themselves. The list is now back in its original form. No official announcement or explanations from the staff so far.

TTL asks: does anyone know anything more about this? What is this advisory panel and who sits on it and what commitments has LJ and its owners made to follow their recommendations?

On the face of things, it sounds like a good plan of action. As was pointed out in one journal, it will create a permanent record of user grievance and will not harm LJ the way it would if people left the service.

Comments

[mentalmakeup.livejournal.com]

I wish I saw the use of this; I wish I thought it would have an impact. The bottom line is that it will reach a certain userbase, and that userbase will take part for 24 hours; not deleting their accounts, and therefore not endangering SUP's profit margin; and even more in SUP's favour, it will lighten their server load for 24 hours so that all LJ, free, sponsored, paid, will be lightning-quick.

I really strongly disagree with their decision, but they've made clear that it's purely a business one, and I can understand that. I've had an LJ account for... a long ass time now. I'm not going to leave, and the strike would only benefit them, IMO. I wish I had any suggestions as to what WOULD work.

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

Yes, I suppose it would only hurt hit numbers on sponsored pages.

It is a huge mistake. If LJ is going to be closed to a large number of people who can't afford it (youth, students, others) it loses a lot of vitality. Vitality comes from numbers. Community comes from numbers.

All the LJ debates have been about what I consider LJ's responsibility to nurture a community it has created. Society is important and just because it doesn't appear on your accountant's balance sheet, it doesn't mean you don't have responsibility for it.

Furthermore, the fact that LJ has not learned from last year that it should be inclusive and transparent in its decision making is extremely depressing. it's like trying to debate the ethics of illegal downloading with someone who just keeps going, "BUT IT'S ILLEGAL" over and over again.

[mofic.livejournal.com]

How is requiring that free accounts have ads closing lj to youth, students, or others who can't afford a free account? I don't mean to be difficult, but I really don't understand this. I access so many sites where I don't pay but there are ads I can look at or ignore...

[talktooloose.livejournal.com]

I only understood this part when I read another page. I thought there would be no more accounts without paying. Maybe I should just delete this post...

Or make another one about the detrimental effects of advertising and how you shouldn't have to buy your way out...

Or whatever.

[mofic.livejournal.com]

I suppose advertising is evil, but mostly I ignore it :-). And lots of websites have it and don't seem to draw this kind of fire. A few people involved in this strike or boycott said they would no longer recommend lj, including teachers who said they used to recommend it to students. I don't get that. One of the most useful sites for research of lots of kinds is www.nytimes.com. Their premium accounts (which let you search their archives back to 1851) used to be only for those who paid or get home delivery. Now it's free (and I'm thinking of giving up home delivery). I assume that's because they want their hits up for their advertisers. Fine with me.

I'm particularly surprised that advertising is such a concern among folks active in media fandom, where the content they're fannish about is, in large part, commercial television.

[snowmit.livejournal.com]

What with Adblock and flashblock advertising (says the advertising broker) is ignored by most of the people who don't want to see it anyway.

I don't see advertising supported pages as being a big evil, I'm not sure why you do. Someone has to pay for the servers, bandwidth and staff costs. Paid members like me account for some of it and other members can happily suffer through ads and get free service.

[snowmit.livejournal.com]

The censoring search results thing I'm less happy about but it looks like that got reversed so.... a tie?

[lux-apollo.livejournal.com]

I dunno about that. Has the search-censoring changed back? I thought ttl only meant the fact that those subjects were hidden from being displayed on the 'most popular interests' list.

[lux-apollo.livejournal.com]

Are you American? j/k