Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

1. Although there was that apology for how the account structure change was handled, and gestures toward the inclusion-in-process that we want, I still haven't seen meaningful communication regarding the popular-interests shenanigans.
2. I can't tell yet -- it'll take time to see the followthrough -- whether the official post was a slick attempt to take the wind out of the strike's sails, or a way to respond to our concerns early enough to avoid looking as though it's 'because the strike worked' (i.e. a face-saving ploy rather than a stringing-us-along ploy).
3. Since as I see it the "strike" is more about visibility than about hurting SUP/LJ -- that is, I don't think a one-day blip in their stats is going to harm them enough for them to notice averaged over the week and didn't think it would be enough to "force" them to capitulate (which is why I said earlier that my participation would be a gesture of solidarity with other users, not an expectation of pressuring SUP to behave), but might (if enough users participate) illustrate the harm that could result if they drive us away by making the place inhospitable -- I don't see it as "punishing them even though they apologized (for the poor handling of the account-levels thing)". I see it as gathering evidence to support the hypothesis that playing nice is not just about getting us to shut up, but about preserving LJ in the long term.
4. The "strike" would have ended after twenty four hours regardless of whether SUP did the right things.
5. I do not want to present the idea that no matter how upset we become over bad actions we can be pacified by cleverly-timed words,
6. But at the same time I don't want to present the notion that all we want to do is "lash out" or "hurt SUP" and the recent badness is just an excuse; nor the idea that responding to us is pointless because we'll just throw a tantrum anyhow,
7. So I feel it's important to lay out my thoughts regarding participating in this protest at this time despite the missive from the LJ staff, as carefully as I can (given that I'm still exhausted darn it), since any course of action or inaction that I can take at this point sends an ambiguous message on its own without an explicit verbal message along with it.

DESPITE my belief that a one-day protest won't hurt SUP enough to really count -- as I argued in my first entry on the topic where I explained that my intended participation was a message aimed at fellow protesters more than at SUP -- this has NOT been an easy decision. Because I really do not want to help make us look like whiny drama-llamas who can never be satisfied, and I really do not want to help make us look like easily manipulated victims who will roll over for whatever abuse is dumped on us as long as an apology comes soon enough afterward. (And no, I'm not 100% certain that I've made the correct choice -- you've got a few hours to argue one way or the other in comments, but I'll be afk for a chunk of that critical argument-period.)

I will say this much about an important effect of SUP's cleverly-timed[*] apology: once I've gotten around to coding the script that makes it convenient to automagically crosspost everywhere else but only leave a "the entry I wrote is over on this other site" link at LiveJournal -- as I'm going to finish up for tomorrow's QotD entry -- the idea of making my seemingly-inevitable break with LJ by continuing my own single-user strike indefinitely after the one-day protest ended seemed like a good idea. But the LJ staff have managed to convince me to return after the protest, to watch how things play out, and to continue to offer SUP/LJ advice on how to preserve LJ in case they really are going to listen after all.

So to my LJ family I say: I'll see you after the protest. And to my friends on other sites I say: I promise not to talk constantly about LJ during the protest -- I do have other things I've been meaning to write about.

[*] Whether it's sincere or not, and whether they stick to it afterward or not, it's cleverly timed regardless. And my intent in saying so is not snark, merely recognition of strategic thinking.