Alternative to Deletion

[mercurychaos]

My original suggestion was that all of us with Plus accounts downgrade them to Basic, as SUP cannot get advertising money if there are no advertisments. But as gamahucheur pointed out: "even those with Basic accounts are providing content, which draws Plus subscribers and non-subscribing readers."

And lizzie_borden also made a very good point that: "You can never come to

Comments

[imaria]

(Please edit to fix HTML! Thanks!)

[mercurychaos]

Done.

[dancesontrains]

For some reason, the HTML was fine when I viewed this on my f-list; but when I clicked the comment button, the last two paragraphs became one massive LJ archive link.

[mercurychaos]

Mkay fixed it. @_@ That's what I get for trying to do HTML when I'm sleepy...

[havocthecat]

Icon love!

[dancesontrains]

Thanks, it feels like the appropriate one to use these days.

[mercurychaos]

This really isn't about leaving, it's about denying them potential revenue. The idea is to send them the message that if they want to get any kind of profit from this service, be it from advertising or the sale of paid accounts, then they will not alienate and ignore their user base the way SixApart did.

[spyder]

Whilst I understand the principle, I do think that unless you can guarantee a lot more users taking part, this action would barely register against the general background noise of LJ usage.

From LJ's own stats page there are nearly 14.5 million accounts. Just over 8.8 million of those have ever updated. Taking into account my rounding, there's almost 5.6 million accounts that have never updated, and so have no content. A few hundred more wouldn't show up against that.

[caprinus]

Bingo. More users, and/or "high-value" users, the ones with proven reach beyond a narrow circle of friends. The people who get tons of anonymous/OpenID comments, whose flists are maxed out, etc.

[gamahucheur]

What he's doing is good as a supplement to more effective action, but it is no more than that.

[caprinus]

we're not obligated to begin contributing again until things change for the better

Is there some kind of a metric for when things change for the better? And, if your "blogging location" is elsewhere and you find this state of affairs satisfactory for the moment, even if things do change for the better in some measurable way, what's your incentive for coming back and investing in LJ again? What's SUP's incentive for catering to self-avowed parasites?

Lastly, your idea that community posts and comments on other people's entries aren't valuable contributions to content and therefore stakeholder value is suspect. If you want to have people "deny value" to LJ by curbing their posting activities, then curb them.