Comments | news: The 100th day

news

The 100th day

Mar 12, 2008 18:57

Today marks the 100th day since we announced SUP's purchase of LiveJournal from Six Apart, the formation of LiveJournal, Inc, and goals for the first 100 days. We've made some amazing progress since that announcement, and we're really proud of what we've accomplished in such a short period of time: the team in the U.S. is growing, we've gained a ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

Basic accounts jasonshellen March 13 2008, 00:46:10 UTC

Hi, I'm Jason Shellen, VP of Product Development for LiveJournal. I just wanted to clarify LiveJournal's stance before there is any further misunderstanding about what we are trying to do. An FAQ about the account levels was updated prior to our news post. It states ( ... )

admiralmemo March 14 2008, 07:42:16 UTC

AdBlock it all.

Actually, according to the current ToS, saying that can get your account suspended. Let me quote a few parts.

You also understand and agree that you will not obscure any advertisements from general view via HTML/CSS or any other means.

You agree NOT to use this service to... Employ tactics to prevent the full and complete display of advertisements on LiveJournal pages. These include, but are not limited to, making journal style changes, customizations, or overrides that effectively block or substantially impair the display of advertisements on a Plus account's Content or other pages within the Service.

(The comment has been removed)

admiralmemo March 14 2008, 09:20:13 UTC

To be honest, those parts of the ToS have been in there long before SUP. They were put there by 6A when 6A first introduced Plus accounts.

hematopoetic March 16 2008, 06:41:03 UTC

6A (aka SA) was only marginally better.

SALJ -- something TRULY awful!

candidcouture March 17 2008, 19:45:57 UTC

6A has nothing to do with Something Awful. ..Right?

msree March 14 2008, 10:48:02 UTC

It's my understanding that "general view" means for anyone who views your page. You can run AdBlock in your browser. What you're not allowed to do is code your LJ in a way that hides the ads.

admiralmemo March 14 2008, 12:12:25 UTC

I agree that that is how it's SUPPOSED to be interpreted. However, if SUP can pull free accounts out from under out noses without warning (i.e.: make changes to their own advantage), how much easier is it for them to make a different interpretation of the ToS (i.e.: using what's already there to their own advantage)?

Re: Basic accounts t0d3s3ng3l March 15 2008, 07:09:41 UTC

Problem is; disregarding the ToS thing, because that should not have any say, as mentioned above, to what we do with our browsers; that not many people (yes I know...MILLIONS do) are smart enough to switch to Firefox (step 1) and only a handful of that fraction know how to use AdBlock (albeit it is the most popular Add-On)

Re: Basic accounts shaunotd March 16 2008, 10:49:27 UTC

I would, but pretty much my whole f'list have old basic accounts - and now so will I, once my annual payment expires next January...

Re: Basic accounts sparkindarkness March 13 2008, 12:31:19 UTC

*agreed so very much*

Re: Basic accounts mellaithwen March 13 2008, 14:09:50 UTC

hear hear dude!

Re: Basic accounts art_house_queen March 13 2008, 17:07:51 UTC

WIN.

Re: Basic accounts thevelvetsun March 13 2008, 17:09:49 UTC

I think it's wonderful that people who used to work for LJ are speaking out against this (you and Brad, that I know of), but at the same time, it's sad that they won't listen to you. Or us, for that matter.

Re: Basic accounts rahaeli March 13 2008, 17:14:49 UTC

For the record, I'm ambivalent about the actual decision (I don't like it, but if it's business-necessary, which I no longer have any insight into, then it's business-necessary and that's that). I think there are many alternate revenue streams LJ, Inc. could and should be pursuing instead, ones that are tailored to this specific service instead of being a grafted-on Web 2.0 one-business-model-fits-all solution, but when push comes to shove, hey, you gotta keep the servers on.

What I object to is the stealth and the spin. Own your fucking decisions, man.

Re: Basic accounts thevelvetsun March 13 2008, 17:19:45 UTC

I agree. The way they tried to keep this a secret and then they lied about their motives and insulted our intelligence was a really bad decision, especially considering how little trust most LJ users have in the leadership lately.

If they announced more account options instead of taking away options, the users would be ecstatic. Imagine letting people buy userpics in 50-unit increments, all the way up to 400 or so. At 40kb each that would take up very little room on the servers. LJ would be raking in the cash and the users would be happy, and they could afford to keep the free users.

Back to all threads