. (anadott) wrote in suggestions,
.
anadott
suggestions

Public / Protected entries

Title
Public / Protected entries

Short, concise description of the idea
A way to tell people who are reading our journal that there is a friends-only entry available.

Full description of the idea
Here's the thing: to see a friends-only entry, the 'friend' has to be logged in, right? Ok... my problem with that is that most of the times you don't really log in when you go just reading journals, specially if you're using the client program (and click 'what are my friends doing?' -it doesn't log you in), so you don't even notice those entries there, unless the owner of the journal says something in a public post or you happen to have logged in before you went there... My suggestion would be to display something in the journal that says ''this is a friends only entry. please log in to read it if you're a friend.''. That way you know your friend has updated and you go there to read it if you want to... And here is where it would have to combine another suggestion I've seen here: There could be a link for the person to log in and then be directed to the entry they were trying to read. I mean, it wouldn't make much sense having to go all the way to the front page, loggin in, then coming back to the friend's journal to find the entry, would it? Also, this could be an optional feature (like: do you want your friends-only posts to be announced in the public journal? yes/no), since there are people who would prefer to keep their friends-only posts *really* secret. :) -> By the way, if there's a way that choice can be overriden for just one entry, it would be nice too. (ie, you chose not to announce the posts and for just one entry you want it done...) This works somewhat like some guestbooks that have private message options... you get there and it says it's a private message, and if you're the owner you can log in from there and read it. So I guess it's something that can be done...

An ordered list of benefits

  • No more entries ignored because your friends don't log in.
  • No more having to announce 'hey, I made a friends-only post', forcing your friends to go read it just because you had the trouble of announcing it for them.
  • It makes it possible to know if a person has just stopped posting when you get to a journal that seems to be dead or if they're just posting to friends only (the optional feature would be handy here - some people do want to seem dead to non friends).
  • An ordered list of problems/issues involved

  • Ok, I have no idea of what kind of work you guys would have to do to make this work, sorry! :) I guess that would be the drawback, some amount of work... :)
  • No, wait: drawback #2... what to do with already existing friends-only posts? My suggestion: the default option would be not announcing the posts. If you choose to do it then, it will affect *all* of your journal, including previous entries. How that is done, I don't know, but I guess it's easier than making it affect just the posts made after the change!
  • An organized list, or a few short paragraphs detailing suggestions for implementation

  • Basically, a message would be displayed in the journal wherever a friends-only post is located, so that if you're a friend and not logged in, you can log in and see it.
  • The message would contain a link so you can log in and be redirected to the page you were trying to read.
  • Option included (on settings - personal info, probably) so you can choose if your friends-only posts are announced in your journal for the general public or not.
  • If possible, option to override that option for just one entry (both in entries made via site and via client!!).
  • I'm not sure this is what you wanted in this field, hehe, but I thought I'd make it clearer... :) Thanks for listening!!
  • Tags: entries, friends page, security, § historical
    Subscribe
    • Post a new comment

      Error

      Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

      default userpic

      Your reply will be screened

      Your IP address will be recorded 

    • 9 comments