This suggestion is probably going to be full of holes, but I thought I'd put it out there:
What about more of a screened/placeholder system? Have all the community posts and comments imported and IN the DW database, but all old posts are screened (maybe even screened to the point of being invisible to the maintainer?), or have a placeholder of "Archive Post/Comment by OpenID user" in their place (sort of like you sometimes see in comments from screened/deleted users), until we're able to combine our OpenID accounts with our full DW accounts. (I hope I worded that right.) And once the OpenID account is claimed, the posts are automatically unscreened? I don't even know how possible this is, but it would seem to simplify life both for the maintainer and for the worried OpenID user. On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Lije Carpenter <[email protected]>wrote: > | At the same time, I would be pretty infuriated if I found that an > | entry I had posted to a comm had been reposted somewhere I could not > | assert any control over it. Control of one's own content is a pretty > | bedrock feature of LJ and all it's offspring. So I also don't think > | that the current stop on comm imports is in any way unreasonable. > > Here's a question for you, based on the one I just put to Mark: if the > maintainers of a community to which you belong posted an announcement to > tell folks (or even PM'd every member to let them know) that the community > was moving and/or crossposting to Dreamwidth, and you were given a month to > either remove your content or flag it in some way that let the community > maintainer know that you did *not* want it imported to Dreamwidth (even if > that were by answering a poll), would that be sufficient control for your > comfort level? > > I understand people not wanting to have their content snurched without > their knowledge and posted elsewhere without their consent, but if you knew > about an importation plan in advance and could make it so your material > wasn't going to make the transition to the new site, would that work? > > I'm assuming here that in general it would have to be an all-or-nothing > proposition, for the sake of the sanity of maintainers. I can't imagine a > community with membership in the four-figure range where individual members > wanted to be able to cherry-pick which posts did and didn't make the move. > > > Thanks, > > Alexis Carpenter > principia at Dreamwidth > principia_coh at LiveJournal > > _______________________________________________ > dw-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss >
_______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
