In the case of LoudTwitter specifically, I might like reading all the rest
of that person's posts, but don't like LoudTwitter.

Likewise for other things - I might have a friend who posts a lot of great
content a lot of the time but once a week or so goes off on an obnoxious
tear with things that are not LJ-cut.  It seems like what Azalais suggested
is a good compromise between "wanting to read x but not y of this person's
content" and "cutting altogether."

Lassarina Aoibhell
Webmaster, The RPG Place
http://www.rpgplace.net


On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Hot Tramp <[email protected]>wrote:

> Again, what happened to just defriending/unsubscribing?  If someone
> consistently posts in a manner that makes you uncomfortable, stop
> reading their blog.
>
> - HT
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Azalais Aranxta <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Andrea Nall wrote:
> >
> >> So you are saying Dreamwidth should special-case Loudtwitter?
> >> How about every single meme, quiz, test, or any spam entry, or
> >> anything that some magical algorithm determines is "meaningless
> >> content"?
> >>
> >> There has to be a line somewhere, but Dreamwidth doing things to your
> >> entries seems a bit "evil" to me.
> >
> > I've never understood why people think this about lj-cuts.
> > Blocking, sure, but lj-cuts?
> >
> > Frankly I think lj-cuts should be forced for any post with images
> > or larger than 3 paragraphs.  And if I could put that in blinky
> > text with a marquee, I would.  (Because this is important <--
> > just kidding!)
> >
> > Particularly given that DW allows people to post much longer
> > entries which will be that much more annoying if not lj-cut and
> > of an annoying nature.
> >
> > I started to feel this way because of Very Political People who
> > think that not lj-cutting images of torture victims, images of
> > abused animals or 20 paragraph screeds about the latest Cause
> > "because this is important, and I'm going to Make You Read/Look
> > At it (and I don't care if you have your three year old in your
> > lap, are at work, or are visiting your elderly parents)" will
> > force me to actually look at/read all of it instead of scrolling
> > like mad, AdBlocking the pictures etc.  The dumbest phrase ever
> > used on LJ has got to be "Not cutting because This Is Important"
> > and I think the reaction of nearly everyone who sees it has to be
> > "well fuck, the likelihood that I will actually pay attention to
> > THAT's just gone down by about 300%."
> >
> > (In fact, if you are on my flist and you do this a lot with
> > disgusting images, I adblock your whole photobucket.)
> >
> > Anyhow, LoudTwitter is outside content, unlike memes which people
> > actually do post in their journals; blocking it entirely would be
> > evil, but lj-cutting it, not at all, and allowing readers to opt
> > out of seeing it doesn't seem to me to be any worse than allowing
> > readers to opt out of seeing any other type of outside content
> > they don't want served to them.  Also, most of the vocal
> > defenders of LoudTwitter I'm seeing here that are on my flist are
> > actually LoudTwitter users.  *g*
> >
> > I don't mind LoudTwitter but I can sure understand why other
> > people do, and if you are serving more than a few tweets, it
> > ought to be cut.  (I don't use LoudTwitter, but if I did, I'm
> > sure people would find it obnoxious.  Nobody wants to know what I
> > have to say to Pete and Ashlee Wentz--who don't read it
> > either--or the SPN and MadMen RPers on Twitter unless they
> > actually care about those folks.)
> >
> > Azalais :)
> >
> > ****************************************************************
> > Azalais Aranxta (~malfoy)
> > ataniell93 on LiveJournal and Vox
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/malfoymadness
> >
> > "I know the true world, and you know I do. But we needn't let it
> > think we all bow down." --Christopher Fry
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
dw-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss

Reply via email to