?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Suggestions Box
Want to improve LiveJournal? Contribute your ideas!
27th February 2008 
me - red

Title
Revisiting private userpic pages

Short, concise description of the idea
With regards adult content, and ease of access to userpic pages, we should reconsider the option to restrict access to userpics.

Full description of the idea
Restricting access to a journal's userpics either via a toggle that marks the entire page as 'private' (therefore blocking all access), or by making use of the feature suggested recently for managing and organising userpics, allowing for a 'make userpic private' option included with 'make default' and 'delete'.

It could work similarly to the creation of friend groups, perhaps. 'Make this icon group private', would only allow those icons to appear when manually posted to a journal or community.

Reading back through Suggestions, I see that the feature has already been mentioned, though with an entirely different purpose. I'm not trying to suggest we need to keep our work hidden to prevent theft, but in the same way listing some journals or communities in our profiles may be 'mildly mortifying', some userpics may be better kept private.

Joe Bloggs may be an active and respectable sort of user with a lot of good friends and even some work mates on his friend list. Joe Bloggs might also be a bit of a deviate and likes perusing a couple of shoe fetishist communities with an appropriate, be-sequined stilettos icon to match. Joe Bloggs might appreciate the privacy of doing so without people asking questions about that 'curious' userpic on his userpage.

A suggestion within a suggestion: To offset the protected/private userpic information being hidden, it could be included in the hover information seen with a mouse over the image when displayed in a journal/comm. Information like credits for the artwork, for example.

An ordered list of benefits
  • Privacy options are always welcome.
  • It would be very complementary to the organised userpics feature (that I'm hoping will be approved - oh please, oh please).
  • Complaints about inappropriate icons could be dealt with by flagging / making them private, which may drastically reduce the number of complaints.
An ordered list of problems/issues involved
  • Hmm..
  • Thinking about it.
  • Still thinking...
  • Nope. I got nothing.
L cartoon

Title
Delete all journal entries

Short, concise description of the idea
Delete all journal entries at once.

Full description of the idea
Deleting journal entries one at a time is unnecessarily tedious and painstaking work.

I understand the desire to make it hard for unauthorized persons to delete an entire journal in one click. But there are ways to make this kind of action possible while still protecting the rightful account holder.

Consider a series of steps, complete with "Are you sure?" and captcha and password. Make it as redundant as you want. But in the end, there are good reasons why some account holders want to delete all journal entries in one action.

The fact that this issue is addressed in your FAQ suggests that I am not alone in wanting this feature.

Surely there is a way to make it safe and secure.

Consider the fact that a dedicated hacker won't be deterred by the one-at-a-time situation that we currently have. An angry person who is willing to take the time to hack another user's account will more than likely be willing to delete entries one at a time.

If you're thinking that one-at-a-time deletion of journal entries makes it easier for a user to detect what is happening, then consider this:

How likely is it that this will happen when a valid user is online? Wouldn't a hacker do her best to do this when she suspected the valid account holder /isn't/ online?

Assume that the account holder /is/ online and sees his journal entries being deleted. What then? Is the action required to stop this clear to LJ members? I don't think it is. For my own part, I wouldn't have any idea of what to do. I'd search (frantically) for help while my entries were continuing to vanish.

My point is that you cannot protect against every (or even the most likely) disasters.

Give LJ members the functionality they deserve, but do it responsibly. You do in most every other area of the service.

Thanks for listening.

An ordered list of benefits
  • Advantages are ease of use, plain and simple.
An ordered list of problems/issues involved
  • Disadvantages are few.
  • Yes, an attacker/hacker would be able to do major damage in short order. But putting multiple layers of assent to the action would make it harder to accomplish this.
  • The advantages (primarily ease of use) far outweigh the "protection" that is supposedly given by the current system.
  • Again, thank you for listening.
  • Finally, should you elect not to implement this feature, I would appreciate a dialog with you about why. Not so that I can argue with you, but so that I can understand your reasoning.
  • I respect the fact that you have responsibilities for far more than just my own limited situation and worldview.
This page was loaded Nov 20th 2019, 9:48 pm GMT.