On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 19:58 -0500, Rachel Lee Cherry wrote: > Any comment importing tool (to the extent that one is being > considered) would also have to keep screened comments screened.
For purposes of this kind of state preservation, might it be better to have some kind of 'import_screened' flag for comments, rather than trying to set a reasonable state using the existing flags? On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 20:58 -0500, Denise Paolucci wrote: > I, personally, am of the opinion that there's enough > implied license in submitting a comment to someone else's journal > that it shouldn't be a large liability, AS LONG AS we retain the > ability for the 'owner' of the content to still have the same level > of control/manipulation that they had over the content on LJ. (In > other words, as long as you can still delete your comments even if > they're moved, we should be okay.) Isn't there a 'freeze' option on LJ now, so that a journal author can prevent a comment author from deleting their comments? In other words ( :) ) is this concern fairly irrelevant? I could write a script to freeze every comment on my LJ, so I don't see a problem with frozen/otherwise non-manipulable comments being imported elsewhere. On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 19:37 -0800, Azalais Aranxta wrote: > OT: is there any way to keep things from defaulting to a private > reply? It's a list setting, and the subject of strongly held opinions on both sides over the last *mumble* years of Internet tradition. I hate this setting - other people hate the 'reply to list' setting. If you're really lucky your email client will have a 'reply to list' button/menu option. Mine does, but I always forget to use it. _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
