On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Fox wrote:

> Azalais wrote:
>
> > But if I thought it was just *my* problem I'd never have
> > said this much about it.  I see a lot of pointless arguments on
> > LJ about whether or not something ought to be cut and if I never
> > ever had to read lj-cut wank, I'd be super happy.
>
> A ticky box for posters that says "go ahead and cut everything
> over [x]" isn't a bad idea, but it's not likely the
> THISISIMPORTANT posters you've alluded to would ever tick it.
> Such a ticky box for readers, well, that's a version of what
> we've been talking about here, of course.  :-)

Yes.  I was thinking of a ticky box for readers.  The readers are
the ones who start LJ-cut wank, even though they are usually
*not* the most obnoxious parties in it.  (Srsly, I am amazed at
the amount of vitriol a polite request for a cut can arouse in
some communities, particularly from those who feel they are
defending the rights of employers and don't seem to be aware
that all employees have mandated break time but the fact that
you are on break doesn't make it ok to have nudie shots on your
screen in the office.)

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

Reply via email to