| Comments: |
| From: |
![[info]](http://www.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) johno
|
| Date: |
2/6/2003 3:31:49 PM |
|
|
|
|
>>we're under attack by an idiot with a 10 line Perl script."
> wouldn't it make more sense to not allow "extras" like Perl,
Users are not running perl ON livejournal servers, there are script kiddies running Denial of Service attacks using short little perl scripts they found.
> limit how much stuff the paid users can do with
> style over-rides! Sometimes I go to look at
> someone's journal, and all the friggen bells
> and whistles bog down my browser, I can't imagine
> what it must be doing to the LJ servers.
Styles are just text to the livejournal servers. Very little in a style causes extra load on the servers. Most of the bells and whistles that bog down you browser are running in your browser.
Flashing and moving text, animations, marquees, text that runs away, large graphics, etc, none are controlled by the live journal servers.
> I just have a problem with the idea of posting
> limits for paid users, period. It's not that I want
> to post more than 50 times per day; it's the principle
> of the matter.
Everybody needs limits, because some abusers are paid users.
Besides, I can't even see a news blog doing 50+ posts a day. I'm got some VERY active syndication feeds (slashdot and tech bargains) and they don't top 30 a day.
> It's that we're already paying for a
> service that other sites offer for free.
My standard response to that type of response is:
Then go use the other services.
> "I kind of feel taken. I paid for one thing,
> and now it's something else."
Boo Hoo, and I though college would be one long party, that that the military would take me really cool places, that I would find my "One True Love" on my 18th birthday and I would live happily ever after.
> It just seems like it would be more sensible - and more
> beneficial - to cut out the extraneous crap, than to
> put a limit on legimate posts. Yeah, but what do I know.
Your extraneous crap is someone else's treasured feature.
{Boo Hoo, and I though college would be one long party, that that the military would take me really cool places, that I would find my "One True Love" on my 18th birthday and I would live happily ever after.}
Please don't be rude to me or my friends in my journal. You want to take issue with me in your own journal, that's fine, but this is my journal, and I would ask to be treated with respect here.
That aside, I said nothing derogatory about Brad or Live Journal in general. I stated my opinion in my journal; I don't know why that is causing you to be so defensive. I'm sorry if you were disillusioned with college or military life, but that really doesn't change the fact that if a person pays for a product, they expect to get that product.
Hrmmmm..interesting. I can actually see why this would be practical, maybe it would even improve the infamous LJ down time...hopefully. I don't really love the idea or anything, most people I know on here, including myself, wouldn't really be affected with a post limit of 5 per day. In fact even if it were one per day there is still a way around it by just adding to a journal entry instead of making a whole new one. The big problem that I see with this is the limits on community posting. I think they should be immune from the limits, but according to that guy they aren't. When they start limiting comments is when I'm going to be in kill mode. I think I'd actually move to another Journal site if I couldn't post comments as much as I wanted.
| From: |
johno
|
| Date: |
2/6/2003 3:57:18 PM |
|
|
|
|
No limits on comments, only original posts.
It is the user that is limited to the number of posts they can make.
So 40 users can posts to a community a day, but a free account holder can only post 5 total posts day (whether to their own journal or a community).
ooh I see. Well that's not quite as bad then. I could deal with that. Hell, I barely update my journal weekly sometimes. Thanks for the clarification. :)
| From: |
muridae
|
| Date: |
2/6/2003 3:42:46 PM |
|
|
|
|
I think the limits totally suck. I'm a paid user because I like the site, I want to be able to modify my journal, I want access to faster servers, and I want to support what the LJ folks are doing. But I haven't always been a paid user, and if I came here, and found that I had to pay just to post more than 3 or 5 times a day, I never would have stayed -- I'd have a blog, or go to DiaryLand or DeadJournal. I try to keep a paid account, but sometimes I have to let it slip for a month or two because I've got other things to worry about.
The posting limits are annoying especially because AFAIK they still count for posts to communities -- one user's post in a community counts against their limit and against the community's limit. That completely sucks! I keep my own journal paid for, but I don't have or want to pay the extra money for my communities too! Dude! That sucks!
The whole thing makes me mad.
(You know, it's a lot like when James wanted to limit posts to the ratlist to a few per day, because he didn't like how much traffic there was. Everyone suffers.)
I have been a paid user for MOST of my time here - it's free now because I didn't get the reminder when my email address was down recently - plus I just gave them $15 to change my username. I don't know that I would have (or will in the future) support them financially, if they plan to restrict the service that I have paid for.
And the thing is, who knows what else they'll decide to restrict? If restricting the number of posts isn't enough, will they begin to restrict the size of posts? The number of comments?
I still say, it would make more sense to ban the users who are causing the abuse, than to punish everyone.
| From: |
marlowe1
|
| Date: |
2/7/2003 10:13:50 AM |
|
|
|
|
BUt just a quick glance at your calendar shows that you really never posted more than 8 posts a day. The only people that would be affected by the limits would be the ones that do the one line posts--
10:00 My moms a bitch
10:06 I hate that bitch
10:46 Brad said hi to me today. He is so cute but I thought he liked Amanda
10:59 He does like AManda but Amanda is so totally into Jeremy
11:43 Guys stop posting insults on my journal, that is like so Gay
12:39 I am not homophobic. Phuc U - u thnk ur smrt but yr not
1:38 Amanda told me to back off with Brad - fuck u Amanda
1:57 How Goth Are you - here's my quiz result
1:58 Which Albanian Beauty Contestant are you?
1:59 Which 70s pop song are you
2:03 - (Five more quizzes)
3:10 Schools over but my mom wants me to go to some family thing - what a bitch
4:10 I'm bored
4:46 My mom just came in and totally blew up at me for nothing. Bitch
4:59 AManda called and apologized - I don't think I'm going to accept it
5:16 War is bad. Fuck you warmongers
5:30 Josh called and asked me out on Saturday - gross. I thought he was gay
5:40 would everyone stop telling me that I'm homophobic
11:39 I hate myself. I want to die. But I hate all u fckers more!
Personally I thought that 20 posts a day limit was generous. The 50 posts a day? Uhuh. That's not even a limit. I personally think that free users should be limited. It's a FREE service. If they want to post more often, let them pay. I would say that if I was free or paid (I'm currently paid but most of the time I'm not) because this is a great service and despite the ocassional crash I really don't see how they can make money off it.
Or in other words - would you prefer popup windows?
Re: the limits on paid users - it's the principle of the matter. No, I don't want to post 50 times per day, and I don't know anyone who would. I wouldn't have someone on my friends list who did. But paid users make up a VERY small percentage of Live Journal users, and I don't think it would hurt for them - in theory anyway - to have UNLIMITED access. It isn't like someone is actually going to sit there and post as many times as they possibly can! It's not a buffet.
I just think that their time would be better spent by thwarting the people who are actually causing a problem, rather than restricting the people who aren't. Ya know?
| From: |
muridae
|
| Date: |
2/7/2003 10:44:25 AM |
|
|
|
|
Actually, pop-up windows don't bother me in the least, but that's only because I don't use either of the big browsers -- I use Opera, which I have set to block all pop-ups. But that's not really the point.
I don't think that the limits for paid users make any difference. I mean, 50-70 posts, I've never ever posted 50 posts in a day and I can't imagine needing to do so. That's like not having a limit at all. It's the limits for free users, and free communities. I'm so sick of hearing all the paid users complaining about how free users do nothing but slow down the servers and take what other people are paying for. They make a community here. Many of them are nice and interesting to read and I don't like the fact that they were planning on limiting posts to only a few day; I keep in contact with a lot of my friends here, and I don't like the idea that many of them might leave to find a free-er place, and that I won't get to read them here anymore.
Sure, you get what you pay for, and it costs a lot to run LJ. Sure, many people won't ever hit the posting limits. I don't know what a better or more efficient way would be to do things. I have no suggestions. I just don't like the idea of not getting to read my friends, and I've heard more than a few people saying that they will leave.
I also don't like the fact that the LJ folks seem to have a tendency to implement changes without telling anyone that they're planning on doing so. This is not the first time they've made a change without notifying any users. That's just not good business sense.
At least they turned it back off and gave us a few days to get used to the idea, and are taking into account the complaints of the users.
| From: |
thanny
|
| Date: |
2/6/2003 9:40:57 PM |
|
|
|
|
i totally agree with you-- i was thinking this morning, after i read through the posts, that they should really implement these changes AFTER a person's paid time is up, because you are getting something different. you aren't getting the service that you paid for. and if someone really wanted to go out there and fight it, they'd probably have a decent shot.
i don't know who'd go through all that trouble for $25, but i agree with you. it's the principle of it all. it's not how you run a successful business.
| From: |
marlowe1
|
| Date: |
2/7/2003 10:19:47 AM |
|
|
|
|
And how would you run a "successful business"?
| From: |
thanny
|
| Date: |
2/7/2003 10:26:12 AM |
|
|
Re: |
|
well for one, i wouldn't have a 23 year old tech guy in charge of it, who turns off comments cuz it's his berfday and he doesn't want any headaches. who ends business polls with 'are you mad at us?!' he's a great technical guy, but he has zero PR or business sense. it's been said before, and i agree: they have to decide if this is just a money-making hobby or an actual business.
if it were my business, i'd create a plan for it and STICK WITH IT. i wouldn't drastically change the service of what people have already paid for, i wouldn't purposely slow the site down to carry more users, i wouldn't have so many users frustrated with the service. if he wanted things to run smoothly and successfully, he should have anticipated problems like growth. and if he doesn't want free users on this site, then he should just ban them or end their service. then the 5% or so of the site who does pay for this can use it as it should be used.
A limit of 50-70 posts/day sounds like a pretty fricking reasonable compromise to me. I mean, if someone suddenly told you there was a limit found to infinity would you suddenly feel cheated? It's not like you would ever hit that limit. I have yet to meet anyone who could possibly break that 50-70 barrier, and if they did they'd certainly be off MY friends list in a flash.
Also, I'd feel much more 'cheated' as a paid user if they somehow limited my abilities to put up scripts or whathaveyou, than if they just limited me to 50 posts/day.
I can see the argument of waiting for the paid time to expire before implementing changes to the user agreement. Otherwise I am very much for the changes. It is far more irritating to me to have downtime than to not have the hypothetical ability to post infinitely.
LiveJournal is very generous to provide free accounts in the first place, so free users should feel lucky. They haven't sacrificed anything, why should LiveJournal do anything for them in the first place? I feel lucky to have any kind of free service. Besides, most other free services also limit you in some ways. For instance, Yahoo! Mail limits you to what, 6 megs? LiveJournal will give you a whole lot more, total, plus you can personalize it more and you don't get advertisements.
I am a paid user, and I feel like they are doing me a service by limiting posts and creating more efficiency in the server.
But that's just my take.
[For instance, Yahoo! Mail limits you to what, 6 megs? LiveJournal will give you a whole lot more, total, plus you can personalize it more and you don't get advertisements.]
But this is exactly my point... Yahoo groups and Yahoo Mail USED to be good too. There used to not be nearly as many ads as there are now. They used to offer pop3 email; now you have to pay for that. I'm just afraid that Live Journal won't stop with the post limits, and in a few years, it will be as much of a pain in the ass as Yahoo is now.
| From: |
marlowe1
|
| Date: |
2/7/2003 10:23:14 AM |
|
|
|
|
But it's FREE!! Of course you have to pay for extras if you want them but right now Livejournal users have little reason to get a paid account besides guilt and extra pictures. A company has every right to cut costs and customers have every right to leave when the company no longer serves them. It's not an enroaching tyranny. It's a limit based on what people normally post. If they get too much into the limits then people will leave. It's a balancing act.
But it's not free if you have a paid account, which I normally do. I have no problem with them setting a reasonable limit on free accounts. Actually, in answer you your post above, I have no problem with them using pop-up ads.
(Of course, I use Opera, so I wouldn't see them anyway. You should try Opera, Marlowe - there's a little button on the toolbar that you can use to turn all the graphics on/off - you'd never have to see all those quizzes. ;)
Well, Yahoo is still not terrible. And you can pay to add the service.
And I agree that they should wait until the paid time is up to implement the changes to an account.
But it is still just a slippery-slope argument that if they do this, then they will do something else. I think we should all look at each change that comes along and respond to each individually. That way we can rebel against the bad and keep the good. And if we react very strongly to all changes then they won't know which we really take issue with. It's like crying wolf.
I didn't mean any offense by my comments, and I hope you take none. These are all just my opinions in reaction to your post, and meant as friendly dialogue. I am sorry if it didn't come out that way.
I really enjoy reading your journal and getting to know you.
|
|
[2003]
Opera.
Jeff. I ran out to the supermarket to buy mass quantities of beer for Jeff, and promptly ran into the realtor. How embarrassing.
