Not a story update.
I don't usually do this--I don't think I've ever done this before--but I need to crosspost something here that's up at my much-less-fascinating RL LJ, because I think it's important to let you know where I stand, and to urge you to give some thought to this.
As a lot of you already know, there has been a lot of discussion surrounding the owner of a wiki which, though it appears at first glance to be a fannish endeavour, is in fact, openly, a business, seeking to maximize its profit. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, except the owner solicits people via fandom groups to contribute (many of whom do so thinking it is a hobby site, and not realizing that their visits to the site are being carefully tracked so the owner can cite her traffic stats at potential buyers), doesn't allow editing of material to procede unimpeded, and considers material posted under friendslock to be fair game in her pursuit of information. It's a logical approach, but because of her presence within fandom, it's important you be aware of and fully consider the ramifications of this, so that each of you can choose for yourselves whether or not to give her access to your flocked posts, email address, and whatever tracks you leave behind when you visit her wiki.
lennoxmacbeth has a post here which lays out the "other viewpoint" well and clearly. It's worth reading, because it gives you some unambiguous standards to judge by--ask yourself if you, too, don't care if things behind flock are kept private, and if you are as free as she is to have your workplace, school, and real name made public online. If the answer is "no," then you need to limit your interaction with people who think differently; you don't have to hate them, because that would be silly and pointless, but if you have different expectations and needs regarding privacy you need to sensibly protect yourself and your contacts by not giving them access to your information.
Which is why I have to, at a bare minimum, remove from my friendslist anyone who thinks data-mining and outing flocked material is a good or neutral practice, however much I might like them personally. And that still doesn't protect me from anyone who thinks secretly data-mining flocked material is okay, but I am unwilling to take the further step of assuming every single person on my flist must be dying for a chance to imperil my job or my private life.
I won't be back online for hours and hours and hours, so if I don't reply to comments, it's not that I'm ignoring you; I'm just not here. Perhaps you can talk amongst yourselves? And in case anyone wants to quote from this: go right ahead. this is the nonfriendslocked version for anyone who wants something to link back to.
As a lot of you already know, there has been a lot of discussion surrounding the owner of a wiki which, though it appears at first glance to be a fannish endeavour, is in fact, openly, a business, seeking to maximize its profit. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, except the owner solicits people via fandom groups to contribute (many of whom do so thinking it is a hobby site, and not realizing that their visits to the site are being carefully tracked so the owner can cite her traffic stats at potential buyers), doesn't allow editing of material to procede unimpeded, and considers material posted under friendslock to be fair game in her pursuit of information. It's a logical approach, but because of her presence within fandom, it's important you be aware of and fully consider the ramifications of this, so that each of you can choose for yourselves whether or not to give her access to your flocked posts, email address, and whatever tracks you leave behind when you visit her wiki.
lennoxmacbeth has a post here which lays out the "other viewpoint" well and clearly. It's worth reading, because it gives you some unambiguous standards to judge by--ask yourself if you, too, don't care if things behind flock are kept private, and if you are as free as she is to have your workplace, school, and real name made public online. If the answer is "no," then you need to limit your interaction with people who think differently; you don't have to hate them, because that would be silly and pointless, but if you have different expectations and needs regarding privacy you need to sensibly protect yourself and your contacts by not giving them access to your information.
Which is why I have to, at a bare minimum, remove from my friendslist anyone who thinks data-mining and outing flocked material is a good or neutral practice, however much I might like them personally. And that still doesn't protect me from anyone who thinks secretly data-mining flocked material is okay, but I am unwilling to take the further step of assuming every single person on my flist must be dying for a chance to imperil my job or my private life.
I won't be back online for hours and hours and hours, so if I don't reply to comments, it's not that I'm ignoring you; I'm just not here. Perhaps you can talk amongst yourselves? And in case anyone wants to quote from this: go right ahead. this is the nonfriendslocked version for anyone who wants something to link back to.