Interoperability vs. Preservation of Site Culture
Friday, July 2nd, 2010 08:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
charmianRecently, there was a suggestion about crossposting to Facebook Notes. In general, public opinion was against the suggestion, and in the comments, there was some discussion about whether this option might create problems for DW site culture or not.
For example, this comment bydamned_colonial:
In response, there was an interesting comment left bymatgb, who said:
I don't think that an influx of FB users is likely destroy the culture of pseudonomity at DW. (Especially since a lot of people on DW already are FB users) The culture of real name usage at FB is something which exists mainly because it is the policy of the site, and enforced by FB itself. It's explicitly against the rules at FB not to use it under your real name. In contrast, there are no such rules at DW prohibiting people from using pseuds or from having multiple accounts or personae. The culture at FB is something that is developed by both the technology and the ToS, and at DW, both are different and don't reinforce those aspects of the FB culture.
In general, also, I am sympathetic to Matgb's desire to use DW in a highly interoperable way. IMHO, one of the reasons behind LJ's decline is that in an age where interoperability is becoming more and more important, it's still lagging behind. Tumblr, Posterous, WP.com, all of these allow you to easily push your updates to other platforms. I think it is highly desirable that DW also become an open platform in this way; however, if outside readers/commenters are considered a negative force, then this openness will be decreased.
Or is the site culture of DW really is that fragile? May be better for DW to differentiate itself from other blogging platforms by avoiding interoperability with anything but LJ, by making interoperability only possible by the technically inclined who are able to mess with APIs etc in order to crosspost? What do you all think?
UPDATE:foxfirefey has alerted me to the fact that an earlier suggestion about crossposting to FB was already accepted into the bug database. So the point itself may actually be moot.
For example, this comment by
damned_colonial:
2) I dislike Facebook culture and the style of interaction that happens there. I fear that making it easy to crosspost to Facebook would result in lots of people coming here from Facebook and bringing Facebook social norms, which are at odds with the social norms I enjoy here on DW. (For instance, things I enjoy on DW include: lengthy, thoughtful posts and comments, a respect for pseudonymity, and the ability to segregate one's journalling from one's "real life").
In response, there was an interesting comment left by
matgb, who said: More of my readers come to read my stuff from Twitter and Facebook than do from LJ or DW. Even more come from a UK politics aggregator (or at least did when I was posting regularly). I'd like them to be able to comment effectively. I'd also like to 'push' to those sites I make use of to aggregate my stuff.
Essentially, who are you (or anyone else) to determine what sort of culture I want in my personal journal, and why should a whole site be tarnished because some people don't like the bits they've seen?
[......]
I didn't sign up for a fandom blogging platform, I signed up for an LJ fork that would take the good idea and make it genuinely interoperable. Refusing to deal with other sites because there are "normal" people there and they have a "culture I don't want to see here" is, well, annoying.
I don't think that an influx of FB users is likely destroy the culture of pseudonomity at DW. (Especially since a lot of people on DW already are FB users) The culture of real name usage at FB is something which exists mainly because it is the policy of the site, and enforced by FB itself. It's explicitly against the rules at FB not to use it under your real name. In contrast, there are no such rules at DW prohibiting people from using pseuds or from having multiple accounts or personae. The culture at FB is something that is developed by both the technology and the ToS, and at DW, both are different and don't reinforce those aspects of the FB culture.
In general, also, I am sympathetic to Matgb's desire to use DW in a highly interoperable way. IMHO, one of the reasons behind LJ's decline is that in an age where interoperability is becoming more and more important, it's still lagging behind. Tumblr, Posterous, WP.com, all of these allow you to easily push your updates to other platforms. I think it is highly desirable that DW also become an open platform in this way; however, if outside readers/commenters are considered a negative force, then this openness will be decreased.
Or is the site culture of DW really is that fragile? May be better for DW to differentiate itself from other blogging platforms by avoiding interoperability with anything but LJ, by making interoperability only possible by the technically inclined who are able to mess with APIs etc in order to crosspost? What do you all think?
UPDATE:
foxfirefey has alerted me to the fact that an earlier suggestion about crossposting to FB was already accepted into the bug database. So the point itself may actually be moot.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 06:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 07:58 am (UTC)Secondly, I personally think Dreamwidth needs to have a bunch of users from places that aren't LJ (or at the very least, people who ditched LJ years and years ago, before the brouhahas). I want some dilution of this damned obsession of what LJ's done wrong. Am I as guilty of that as anyone? Yes. I mean, hell, LJ meta is a hobby of mine and has been for years, and while I do less of it, I haven't stopped. I just think less of it would be a Good Thing™.
And ironically, having a bunch of users not from LJ would make the place more attractive to LJ users, too. Because right now the equation is all wrong for it. Sure, there's some technical features we have that LJ doesn't, but that applies visa versa too. But when it comes to content? Heck, almost everyone cross posts to LJ, so an LJ user doesn't really have anything interesting to gain content-wise by coming over here since only a few people stop cold turkey. And if people do stop cold turkey, there's often hurt feelings about it. But Dreamwidth people that didn't come from LJ wouldn't have that kind of baggage associated with them, and they'd hopefully be more likely to make new content on Dreamwidth that wasn't on LJ.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 08:06 am (UTC)Heh, I try to obsess less about what LJ's doing wrong too, because really, it's not like my opinion on whatever LJ Be Doing WROOOONG Today really matters to LJ anyhow, or will accomplish anything. (It's why stopped commenting on LJ news) But yeah, I think that is what people on the site do have in common. For example, my posts here on LJ get more attention than my posts on non-LJ matters.
But yes, I do agree that it would be good to get more non-LJ users in. And your point about it becoming more attractive to LJ users/DW users as well is important. As LJ continues to create more new technical features, it can also become more competitive with DW. However, I think marketing DW to non-LJ users will demand an entirely new kind of 'talking about the site.'
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 08:25 am (UTC)I don't think LJ has to worry about competing with DW. But I do think DW has to work to implement new, distinguishing features. I admit I still twitch with pedantry every time Dreamwidth gets called a "clone", and the more we can shake that off, the better we'll be, I think. update page update page update page drafts
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 08:42 am (UTC)(BTW, speaking of FB, it seems that LJ is doing something called 'Facebook Integration,' but it's not really clear what this will consist of)
http://community.livejournal.com/changelog/8786234.html
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 09:04 am (UTC)I know I do try not to go on about how DW relates to LJ when I talk about why I love it. Because I don't think it's actually particularly useful to anyone at all. I am, in fact, a rather bitter ex-LJ user. But I recognise that that's not a very appealing thing to listen to -- it's not what I want to focus on myself, why would people who don't even have that context or whose context for it is very different than mine want to hear about what amounts to an LJ rant dressed up in "ooh shiny DW!" clothes.
I think a lot of people need to just let go of LJ which is, I know, really hard. I haven't really managed it, myself. But if we've bailed on it, if it's not our future... then why are we stuck on comparing Dreamwidth to it? Dreamwidth might have its roots in LJ, but its future's ought to be its own. And yeah, if it establishes itself as a unique thing all its own, with lots of unique content, it's more appealing to everyone.
tl;dr summarised: I agree!
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 09:15 am (UTC)The biggest reason is because of the audience for the comparison. It's natural to compare DW to LJ when speaking to LJ users. Viral growth means that the new users have ties to the existing ones, and usually these ties were formed on LJ, so the pattern simply reinforces itself. The amount of crossposting going on further means that people who see DW for the first time are likely to be LJ users.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-03 01:32 pm (UTC)