The Old Cyber Neighborhood

[plumtreeblossom]

Poor Livejournal. Everyone's attention is being sucked up by Google+. I'm just posting so that LJ's feelings aren't hurt!

Comments

[beowabbit]

Yeah! First Facebook, then Dreamwidth, now this! Pretty soon LiveJournal is going to be sitting at the lunch table all alone.

[library-sexy.livejournal.com]

Still here.

LJ won't be replaced by G+ in my world. G+ has some interesting features, but it is extremely public and as a poster you can't control who sees your posts. You can give a circle of intent, but a commenter can add someone to view it by linking someone outside the circle in a comment.

[beowabbit]

You can give a circle of intent, but a commenter can add someone to view it by linking someone outside the circle in a comment.

I am pretty sure that’s just a bug. It is very alpha software at this point. (But yes, I’ve seen that reported too.)

It’s always possible for somebody who can see what I post to copy-and-paste it into email to somebody I don’t want to see it if they choose to, but the scary thing is that that’s the sort of thing that it’s easy to do by accident — if I’m participating in a private discussion about whether I can trust library_sexy around my book collection, or whether her sexiness might cause my library to burst into flame, it’s the most natural thing in the world to refer to her in the standard way. On LJ, the standard way gives the people I’m talking to a link to your profile and (public) posts. On G+, it notifies you with some of the contents of the conversation.

[library-sexy.livejournal.com]

Completely agree with you on how you refer to someone in the forum you are using. Yes anything can be copied and pasted. As I said on another LJ on this topic nothing on the web is 'private', but on LJ someone needs to actively copy and paste in order to re-post outside those I intend on sharing with.

As for the re-sharing if a comment lists a name it is not a bug, but something I read in the Google+ help:

Your content may be shared beyond the bounds which you originally intended if your post is reshared or if someone is mentioned on your post. For instance, if someone is mentioned in a comment, they'll be able to see the entire post even if the post wasn't originally shared with them.

I don't have a problem with how Google wants to set up their social network rule as long as I understand them and can use the tool as much or as little as I chose. For this reason, I feel that LJ is the place most of my content will continue to be posted (not that there is a lot of it).

[strangeanimal.livejournal.com]

LJ's been circling the drain since long before Google+, trust me. Facebook, and Six Apart selling LJ a few years ago, pretty much did LJ in.

[ron_newman]

I haven't noticed much decrease in davis_square traffic, if at all. Are we unusual here?

[theloriest.livejournal.com]

I think it will be years or even longer before I give up on LJ.

[minkrose]

Plus, a lot of people are out of town; we were, anyway. Plus I had a paper due.

I think some of it is just summer. I have a lot of people on G+ who haven't posted at all yet.

[lillibet.livejournal.com]

I've been making a point of it, too. I really enjoy the conversations here much more.

[moria923.livejournal.com]

How many social networking sites is one person supposed to keep up with? I'm officially on FB now, but keep forgetting to check it. And I have no temptation to go to this Google thing and try to figure out a new interface, though I suppose I would if I felt I was missing too much by not doing so. Personally, I hope I can stick with LJ without missing too much.