Answers from daniidebrabant
daniidebrabant sent the following answers in response to ljvotes's e-mail:
1. Why did you decide to run for LiveJournal User-Representative?
I decided to run because the welfare of this website is something I'm very personally invested in and I thought that I could be a worthwhile addition to the Advisory Board.
2. In which way do you think you are qualified for the position?
Having been a member since Sept 2001 is nice, but it's not really a qualification. For qualifications, I have my working knowledge of the website through extended and varied use, as well as networking capabilities throughout the site. I also have, as said in my original post, a position as a member services representative at another social networking site that currently boasts 15 million members in many countries; if there is any question of clashing priorities, I'll just point out that the company I work for and LJ have completely different base products and at the moment, different markets (as well as different target markets, from what I can discern). I work for who I work for, but a lot of my time is spent on LJ. But to go on from the original point, it is my JOB to convey the wants and needs of the membership to the appropriate people in the correct manner to see these changes accomplished to the memberships desires. I have experience in product management, as well as in writing product specs and understanding technology limits, expectations, and systems. I also understand many of the underlying principles and ideas behind monetization of websites, etc, that give me a unique understanding. While, obviously, I won't be DOING any of this for LJ, the fact that I have the working knowledge will help me to communicate with the LJ side of things.
3. What are your expectations for the LiveJournal User-Representative election?
I can't say that I have expectations; what happens will happen and while I will try my best, I will support and assist (if asked) whoever should win for the greater good.
4. What is your current strategy?
I don't really have a 'strategy'. I've stated my piece and people will vote. I haven't really campaigned other than in my own journal (and that was more posting a link than anything).
5. If elected, what are your hopes for the position and for the Advisory Board? What do you think being a LiveJournal User-Representative and on an Advisory Board entails?
My hope is that this Advisory Board could be the start of something amazing and worthwhile, that it could be something to truly revolutionize some of how social networking, personal publishing, and even to some extent how internet companies function. User generated content sites have been, in the past, a place where users fill in the frames provided by the architects but hopefully, with something like this, LJ will be able to build something that could be more than that and the membership can help.
As for what I think this will entail? A lot of work. And a lot of clear communication (and making sure that communication is clear).
6. When LiveJournal announced the discontinuation of Basic accounts - no new Basic account can be created - they were criticized by LiveJournal users for not consulting the current members of the Advisory Board. What do you think of this event? And did it affect how you view the Advisory Board and the LiveJournal User-Representative positions?
First of all, I'd like to say that I don't really want to discuss my opinion of LJ policies too deeply. It's not because I think I'll upset someone or that they'll think I'm not worth voting for because they disagree with me... but because I don't think that would be my JOB. Having an opinion is not the JOB of an elected official. My job would be to do my very best to express the needs, wants, and opinions of the membership.
That said, I personally found the action executed poorly; deciding to add advertising is a reality of many websites, but there should always be clear communication when it comes to these kinds of decisions and taking away such an option without discussing it with members before they had to be ASKED about it was a very bad move. As for the actual removal of the free accounts, I agree with many who pointed out that free accounts were a gateway for most and getting rid of them was a bad idea.
As for ignoring the word of the Advisory Board, the action made it look very much like the Advisory Board was just for show. And that is an even worse idea because there is very little that enrages people than a 'puppet' body used to keep people placated. We are too savvy, have seen the results in much more serious matters in the past, to find this a good sign. And it was disappointing because, as I've said, I think the Advisory Board has the power to make a better user experience for the members as well as produce better revenue and product for the company.
7. What are your thoughts on privacy and security on the Internet?
This question is too vague and I don't feel comfortable answering it as it is. I think that people are entitled to their security and their privacy just as they are in RL, but beyond that, I don't think this is something to be covered by even a few paragraphs as the question goes quite beyond that length if you seriously consider it.
8. What are some new features you would like to see LiveJournal developing?
Some sort of linking for people with multiple accounts, more icons available to buy, better tools for designing your journal for those without CSS or HTML skills, better integration of the Scrapbook.
9. What are some improvements you would like to see LiveJournal have?
Better communication.
10. And lastly, can you tell me a little bit about yourself?
Uh, what would you like to know?
I'm 24, a Capricorn, and my iTunes playlist includes everything from ICP to classical music to the soundtrack to Monty Python's Holy Grail.
You can read daniidebrabant's original platform here.
Notes: ljvotes encourages readers to comment with questions and/or endorsements for daniidebrabant and for the candidate to comment with their responses in kind. However, please do not leave any disparaging remarks toward any candidates or endorsements for other candidates in the comments.
1. Why did you decide to run for LiveJournal User-Representative?
I decided to run because the welfare of this website is something I'm very personally invested in and I thought that I could be a worthwhile addition to the Advisory Board.
2. In which way do you think you are qualified for the position?
Having been a member since Sept 2001 is nice, but it's not really a qualification. For qualifications, I have my working knowledge of the website through extended and varied use, as well as networking capabilities throughout the site. I also have, as said in my original post, a position as a member services representative at another social networking site that currently boasts 15 million members in many countries; if there is any question of clashing priorities, I'll just point out that the company I work for and LJ have completely different base products and at the moment, different markets (as well as different target markets, from what I can discern). I work for who I work for, but a lot of my time is spent on LJ. But to go on from the original point, it is my JOB to convey the wants and needs of the membership to the appropriate people in the correct manner to see these changes accomplished to the memberships desires. I have experience in product management, as well as in writing product specs and understanding technology limits, expectations, and systems. I also understand many of the underlying principles and ideas behind monetization of websites, etc, that give me a unique understanding. While, obviously, I won't be DOING any of this for LJ, the fact that I have the working knowledge will help me to communicate with the LJ side of things.
3. What are your expectations for the LiveJournal User-Representative election?
I can't say that I have expectations; what happens will happen and while I will try my best, I will support and assist (if asked) whoever should win for the greater good.
4. What is your current strategy?
I don't really have a 'strategy'. I've stated my piece and people will vote. I haven't really campaigned other than in my own journal (and that was more posting a link than anything).
5. If elected, what are your hopes for the position and for the Advisory Board? What do you think being a LiveJournal User-Representative and on an Advisory Board entails?
My hope is that this Advisory Board could be the start of something amazing and worthwhile, that it could be something to truly revolutionize some of how social networking, personal publishing, and even to some extent how internet companies function. User generated content sites have been, in the past, a place where users fill in the frames provided by the architects but hopefully, with something like this, LJ will be able to build something that could be more than that and the membership can help.
As for what I think this will entail? A lot of work. And a lot of clear communication (and making sure that communication is clear).
6. When LiveJournal announced the discontinuation of Basic accounts - no new Basic account can be created - they were criticized by LiveJournal users for not consulting the current members of the Advisory Board. What do you think of this event? And did it affect how you view the Advisory Board and the LiveJournal User-Representative positions?
First of all, I'd like to say that I don't really want to discuss my opinion of LJ policies too deeply. It's not because I think I'll upset someone or that they'll think I'm not worth voting for because they disagree with me... but because I don't think that would be my JOB. Having an opinion is not the JOB of an elected official. My job would be to do my very best to express the needs, wants, and opinions of the membership.
That said, I personally found the action executed poorly; deciding to add advertising is a reality of many websites, but there should always be clear communication when it comes to these kinds of decisions and taking away such an option without discussing it with members before they had to be ASKED about it was a very bad move. As for the actual removal of the free accounts, I agree with many who pointed out that free accounts were a gateway for most and getting rid of them was a bad idea.
As for ignoring the word of the Advisory Board, the action made it look very much like the Advisory Board was just for show. And that is an even worse idea because there is very little that enrages people than a 'puppet' body used to keep people placated. We are too savvy, have seen the results in much more serious matters in the past, to find this a good sign. And it was disappointing because, as I've said, I think the Advisory Board has the power to make a better user experience for the members as well as produce better revenue and product for the company.
7. What are your thoughts on privacy and security on the Internet?
This question is too vague and I don't feel comfortable answering it as it is. I think that people are entitled to their security and their privacy just as they are in RL, but beyond that, I don't think this is something to be covered by even a few paragraphs as the question goes quite beyond that length if you seriously consider it.
8. What are some new features you would like to see LiveJournal developing?
Some sort of linking for people with multiple accounts, more icons available to buy, better tools for designing your journal for those without CSS or HTML skills, better integration of the Scrapbook.
9. What are some improvements you would like to see LiveJournal have?
Better communication.
10. And lastly, can you tell me a little bit about yourself?
Uh, what would you like to know?
I'm 24, a Capricorn, and my iTunes playlist includes everything from ICP to classical music to the soundtrack to Monty Python's Holy Grail.
You can read daniidebrabant's original platform here.
Notes: ljvotes encourages readers to comment with questions and/or endorsements for daniidebrabant and for the candidate to comment with their responses in kind. However, please do not leave any disparaging remarks toward any candidates or endorsements for other candidates in the comments.