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

[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.