Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:31:47 -0400
From: Kit Mason <kit at hers.com>
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Livejournal
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

N Lynch wrote:
> --- "Barry L. Newton" <bnewton at ashcomp.com> wrote:
>
>>Interestingly, Kit Mason said:
>>
>>>here was when it appeared in the post.  I would
>>
>>rather it had not, as it
>>
>>>is of no interest to WSFA and is not written for
>>
>>the vast public's
>>
>>>consumption;
>>
>>My livejournal is pretty dead most of the time, the
>>posts there are
>>*extremely* rare.  But they are also written with
>>the same provisio I apply
>>to all internet writing:  it's as secure as the
>>front page of the Washington Post.
>
> I don't think that's Kit's point - LJ is not a part of
> WSFA.  If someone wants the world to read their LJ,
> they offer the address in their sig; if not, they
> don't.

Exactly.  Thank you.  I'm neither ashamed nor embarrassed by anything
I've written online, but I doubt that WSFA is interested in much of it,
as that's not the intended audience.

>
> I have to question the timing of the post about LJ - a
> weekend where people were very likely to be away and
> out of touch.  I know we were.  Also it should not
> have been opting out especially when it is noted that
> people do not immediately identify themselves.

It *should* have been a matter of opting in, not opting out.  If people
chose to share their LJ username, they should have said so, rathar that
the reverse.

Kit