(no subject)
I've been watching some impressive forms of LJ drama go down over the last two days. I've more or less stayed out of it on LJ. More fundamentally than anything else, it's about two people who have strong personalities (or not having met them, it could be strong virtual personalities - but I doubt it) who are mutually opposed, and the rest of it is just people lining up along the magnetic personality lines of force.
However, I'd like to take this post in a different direction, and wonder why these dramas seem more extreme, stormier, on LJ than on, say, a mailing list or an irc channel.
There are multiple factors involved, and I'm going to mention several of them before getting metaphysical with one of them. First up, LJ has no controlling element, no list-owner or admin. Each individual can control, to some degree, who or what s/he sees, and so there's no need for an admin to be constantly on-duty. This is also true of some other virtual environments, such as LambdaMOO, but they're more immersive and less populated.
Second, that previously mentioned control is somewhat illusory - unless you think very carefully about what you're doing, you will end up seeing things you might not want to see, or showing other people things you don't want them to see.
Third, and this is the one that looks trivial, and isn't: LJ uses the word "friend" to signify someone you want to read, and someone you will normally allow to read your more private posts. That "and" there can't be emphasised enough - because if you think about it for a minute, these two categories are not always the same.
I've dealt with this by simply never posting friends-only posts - every single one of my posts is out in the open, and anyone can respond to them, anonymous or not.
Further: Words are magic. It's a tenet of most forms of paganism that will is magic, and words are just a focus, but this seems not to be the case. Words make huge differences. And the word that the LJ admins have chosen to use here is "friend" (possibly derived from the friend toggle on talker lists - or some common root). If they'd chosen to use the words "permit" and "follow" for the two functions of the friends list, people would feel very different about it. If they'd used just "list", or "track", things would be different again.
I'm not suggesting that this be changed, as such. But it makes a difference, and for those of you who do a lot of livejournalling, it's good to see that difference.
However, I'd like to take this post in a different direction, and wonder why these dramas seem more extreme, stormier, on LJ than on, say, a mailing list or an irc channel.
There are multiple factors involved, and I'm going to mention several of them before getting metaphysical with one of them. First up, LJ has no controlling element, no list-owner or admin. Each individual can control, to some degree, who or what s/he sees, and so there's no need for an admin to be constantly on-duty. This is also true of some other virtual environments, such as LambdaMOO, but they're more immersive and less populated.
Second, that previously mentioned control is somewhat illusory - unless you think very carefully about what you're doing, you will end up seeing things you might not want to see, or showing other people things you don't want them to see.
Third, and this is the one that looks trivial, and isn't: LJ uses the word "friend" to signify someone you want to read, and someone you will normally allow to read your more private posts. That "and" there can't be emphasised enough - because if you think about it for a minute, these two categories are not always the same.
I've dealt with this by simply never posting friends-only posts - every single one of my posts is out in the open, and anyone can respond to them, anonymous or not.
Further: Words are magic. It's a tenet of most forms of paganism that will is magic, and words are just a focus, but this seems not to be the case. Words make huge differences. And the word that the LJ admins have chosen to use here is "friend" (possibly derived from the friend toggle on talker lists - or some common root). If they'd chosen to use the words "permit" and "follow" for the two functions of the friends list, people would feel very different about it. If they'd used just "list", or "track", things would be different again.
I'm not suggesting that this be changed, as such. But it makes a difference, and for those of you who do a lot of livejournalling, it's good to see that difference.
no subject
I think that on LJ, people assume they can and should talk about *everything*, because it's their journal - whereas on mailing lists, people go there to talk about a specific range of subjects (even on TH), and there's an understanding that some things, especially interpersonal conflicts, are offtopic and should be dealt with off list.
In addition, maybe LJ encourages people to play to the audience more? Because they have this named group of 'friends' who they can get reactions from?
Certainly, it's still down to the people involved to choose how they use LJ. But I think for some personality types, especially the more extrovert and perhaps the more manipulative as well, it makes conflict more likely and more public.
Oh, and the other thing - people seem to have a lot of real-life friends on LJ, more so than on mailing lists I've seen. So interpersonal things from non-net life spill over, plus there's more chance to say "why do you say X happened? It wasn't X, it was Y"...
And, it may all be just the way I'm seeing it...
no subject
no subject
no subject
I only lock to "friends-only" one kind of post, the ones about housemate trauma, because Cein & I made that agreement. He reads my journal, I read his, but we aren't on each other's "friends" list so that we can vent about the house w/o the other one getting the brunt of it. Of course, now that he's not talking to me it would be nice to be able to hack into his journal so I know what he's thinking/planning, but I'm not doing that.