LJ allows identity accounts to post in communities

[charmian]

In the latest release, LJ has now allowed for identity accounts (openID, Facebook, Twitter, and others) to post in LJ communities. While this new feature has been overshadowed by the LJ nav strip revision, it seems to have already caused some controversy.

Personally, I'm for this feature (although I don't think that it'll affect me personally much); I really don't think there's much of a security issue with Twitter/FB accounts posting, and actually I'm puzzled by the assertion that LJ-Abuse has less data on the identity accounts than other accounts. I mean, isn't LJ Abuse able to trace even anonymous posters through IP addresses and other things? Anyone with more technical knowledge want to chime in on those aspects?

I now wonder, though, if Dreamwidth is going to implement a similar feature, and if so, would there also be this kind of opposition?

Poll #6955 identity accounts posting in comms on DW

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 33

View Respondents

Should DW allow identity accounts (openID) to make posts in communities?

View Answers

Yes
22 (66.7%)

No
8 (24.2%)

Other (explain in comments)
3 (9.1%)

Comments

Re: Other

[charmian]

Hmm, what do you mean "trust in the userbase"?

The spam situation seems, from what Foxfirefey says, to have been the deciding factor.

Re: Other

[fiddlingfrog.livejournal.com]

What I mean is that the trust DW users have now, for other DW users, is what so many of the objectors on LJ think they have. By having invite codes you do create a more selective group on DW, and other users may feel more comfortable with that group, even if the selectivity is only very slight.

Re: Other

[charmian]

? If they think they have that trust, don't they have it? Trust is something that is within the people who hold it. Whether you or I agree that having that trust is rational or not is another story, but they seem to sincerely believe in it.

Anyway, I am not sure a majority of DW users would be against this, although the point is moot because DW will reportedly not implement this because of spam concerns.

Re: Other

[matgb]

My take is that assumes that everyone wants to contribute to DW or use DW in the 'standard' way.

There're a few people I'd like to get together to make a 'group blog' with--I don't want it to be massively difficult, I want it in a friendly place,a nd I want it to be fairly easy for them to use.

A DW comm would actually be absolutely perfect for this, better than anything else. It would be completely outward facing, if there're DW users that read it other than me, that'd be an added bonus.

I would likely be getting the comm itself to be paid, but the people I'd want posting it, generally, aren't technical people, aren't web people. I'll be teaching them all how to use Twitter over the next few months, and the ideal would be that they just login with Twitter here to post as well.

Some of those people may enjoy DW so much they become normal DW users, and want actual accounts. Most won't.

In addition, the target audience for this blog will be a lot of 'normal' people, it'll be outward facing. Some of them may also come in, join DW, like the place for what it is, etc.

I actually have two, different, distinct blogs in mind, both locally themed, several of the people for one of them are local elected officials, one of whom is learning to use email in order to do the job of Cllr well (he got elected this month).

Allowing it as an option for comms doesn't really affect your usage elsewhere.

I'm ambivalent about keeping codes, and given there're going to be regular holidays now anyway, and anyone can pay for an account, I don't think it matters. Most of my comments (and miss_s_b's comments) come from off site users. I'd like to get some of them more involved.

As some of them will slowly get more used to using the site, I'd like to get them involved. Many, most, of these people are my friends. Some are colleagues, contacts, clients. Many will pay.

I think it's a grand idea. But I can't even really think about using DW as a platform without better identity account interaction.

Re: Other

[fiddlingfrog.livejournal.com]

I suppose I'm not quite expressing myself correctly on this. From my perspective, as a very casual commenter on DW, I would love better identity account integration but it feels like a majority of users would view this as a violation of trust. Now granted, my perspective mostly comes from posts and threads that charmian and azurelunatic point to and from the endless waves of "Come to DW, we don't have Facebook or Twitter" over on LJ news rants, so it might be a bit skewed. And yes, it does assume that there's a standard model of use for DW, but again, my limited experience is that it's the majority model. I'd be glad to be proven wrong, however.

What you want to do with your group blog is exactly why I made the suggestion (http://suggestions.livejournal.com/928644.html) a couple of years ago for OpenID accounts to be able to join and post to communities - I want an open, simple, outward-facing blog that can be used to disseminate information and open discussion among a small group of people. I'm finally having the meeting week after next to get it set up, get the program chairman online at LJ, and hopefully invite the current crop of students to join the community.

Re: Other

[matgb]

Fair enough then--I think most of the fuss over FB/Twitter was the godawful way LJ implemented with no warning and with massive security breach potential.

I haven't seen, after that, much actual fuss, and regularly see Twitter and Facebook accounts commenting in various places, I view that as a dfinite Good Thing.

And frankly the people trying to recruit to DW based on why they got fed up with LJ aren't doing the site any favours at all. I like DW for what it is and what it's trying to be, interoperability is king.

Given that the next version of OpenID is likely to work for Twitter and Facebook anyway by design (although I've stopped following it closely), that specific point may be moot anyway.

Re: Other

[charmian]

I am not sure it's a majority. It's not zero, but I'd be hard pressed to say what's really going on there? And also some of the anti- sentiment seems to be founded on erroneous ideas about how LJ/DW Abuse is run.

Like matgb, also, I think most of the controversy over FB/Twitter wasn't actually about allowing FB/Twitter accounts to comment, but about sharing posts on FB/Twitter, which is different.

Re: Other

[charmian]

Hmm... I wonder if Tumblr wouldn't work for you then? (With Disqus for comments) It depends how many features you need, however. WP I find fairly easy to use, but then I've blogged a lot, so for inexperienced people WP might be too much.

Yeah, I don't know how this is going to affect the appeal of creating comms on DW now that LJ has this function. I've already seen at least one instance of someone using their FB account on a comm I read that appeals to a widespread, public audience.