LOL That was all very fun and entertaining to read. Keeping entries from Google had not occurred to me but I REALLY like that idea too! (On an entry-by-entry basis.)
Forgive me, because I'm posting from my phone so I can't scroll up to see who it was that made the polarized windows analogy - IT IS PERFECT! What I am personally getting at is this: a lot of my friends and especially family (read: "mom and dad") will likely not suspect that I'm "hiding" entries inside the DW community. This is not necessarily added SECURITY, or even privacy, for that matter - it IS a lot like a polarized window and most people walking by my car will not bother to peer in and see if there's anything interesting. So it gives me some wiggle room to make out with my husband in the parking lot and feel fairly confident that no one I care about is going to peek in. ;) The analogy is different in that, it requires less effort to peer in a window than it does to create an account JUST TO SEE if there's "more to read". I'm 98% positive that most people I know wouldn't bother because A.) they don't know to and B.) they aren't curious enough about ME to care to try if they DID know. So because of their own lack of interest in my life, I can "hide" something they might've been interested in knowing for its sheer gossip value. Like I said, I know it's not security and it's unsecured privacy - I would keep that in mind as I post. But it would definitely give me some wiggle room, where certain specific people in my life are concerned. Of course, now that I've posted this to the DW mailing list, if anyone decides to google "chasy" and see what comes up, I've just completely shattered my polarized window. :p - Chasy. On 2/4/09, zvi <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/3/09, Erica Frank wrote: > >> It'd be *great* to be able to have public posts googleable, and >> open-to-DW-users posts not googleable. Right now, since I don't want >> everything I don't limit to my specific f'list to be searchable, I >> have search engines turned off. > > Er, well, two things apply here. One, if the desired security goal is "make > this entry unindexable by spiders", then that's what the security should > *say*. I don't know if that's what Chasy is going for or not, since they > haven't yet chimed back in. > > Second, I *believe *(although I do not know for an absolute certainty) that > one can, in fact, create this level of security by flagging one's content > for adult concepts or adult content, on the theory that spiders don't agree > to view adult content and get a cookie. > > --zvi > > P.S. If a person feels that a natural language solution of five centuries' > standing is beneath their prescriptivist's dignity, they may investigate the > invented pronouns, such as > zie.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zie#Invented_pronouns>I invariably > find that if I want to use such a pronoun, I have to google it > to find its declension, but I'm generally able to recognize its use by > others with little difficulty. 'They', of course, I use with the naturalness > of a native speaker. All English speakers are used to the ambiguity of using > the same pronoun/verb forms to indicate singular or plural, as all English > speakers use 'you.' (Well, I shouldn't say all. I myself have been known to > use both "y'all" and "you guys". But the use of singular you is > well-established in most standard written Englishes.) And that is the last I > shall say on the subject. > -- + + + ><> + + + www.chasyhasanose.com "Faith is to believe what we do not see, and the reward of faith is to see what we believe." - Saint Augustine "My God is so big, so strong and so mighty, there's nothing my God cannot do." - favorite children's song. _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
