Δαφνη Ευτυχια Αρθουρος

Earlier this evening: 70°F/21°C/294K according to the dashboard readout of the outside temperature (and that's about what it felt like on my skin). No idea what it was in the afternoon, as I was indoors emptying buckets out the window (come to think of it, leaning out the window it didn't feel anywhere near as warm as at street level when I left the house). I just checked wunderground.com to get a clue how much longer this rain is going to be dripping in the next room, and I see that for this coming Monday it says, "Chance of Snow".

Huh. What is, this, March or someth... Oh. Right.

Earlier this evening: 70°F/21°C/294K according to the dashboard readout of the outside temperature (and that's about what it felt like on my skin). No idea what it was in the afternoon, as I was indoors emptying buckets out the window (come to think of it, leaning out the window it didn't feel anywhere near as warm as at street level when I left the house). I just checked wunderground.com to get a clue how much longer this rain is going to be dripping in the next room, and I see that for this coming Monday it says, "Chance of Snow".

Huh. What is, this, March or someth... Oh. Right.

In light of my earlier entry, it seemed important to stay awake long enough to post at least the first two paragraphs of this one.

Mr. Nossik, who was interviewed by the Russian press resulting in the inflammatory article that I linked to a translation of aout twelve hours ago, claims to have been misrepresented: http://anton-nossik.livejournal.com/16069.html

This is an interesting development (and media sometimes do misquote); all the more so in combination with the admission from theljstaff in the latest official post ( (http://community.livejournal.com/lj_2008/3846.html, for folks who don't routinely read all the different places official announcements might be spread across) that the change to the account structure was badly handled and badly communicated ("we didn't follow our own rules, and we apologize").

There are words. Some of the right kinds of words. I'm not certain whether there are the right kinds of actions alongside those words, and I'm too sleepy right now to tease apart what is and isn't 'spin' -- it's something to look at much more closely after I've slept, and re-decide whether to participate in the "strike" or not in light of these latest messages.

Urk. You can probably tell I'm too sleepy, because this entry is starting to get too long. Whoops.

There's certainly a big trust issue here. Even if they're sincere, LJ/SUP is working from a difficult trust-deficit, partly inherited from Six Apart (LJ users, when it comes to trusting official nice-speak and promises: once uh, thrice-or-so bitten, twice shy) and partly increased by their own mistakes. We, well, at least I, don't want to be strung along by round after round of "it'll be better this time honey, I mean it, I promise I won't hit you again" when we should be gettin' out of Dodge ... but at the same time, if they are finally learning from their errors and we might be getting what we wanted (not in every detail of course, but in the broad, important strokes involving communication and respect) 'twould be a shame to spit in their faces just as they're finally shaping up. So I'll read this stuff again when I'm feeling more alert, and sort out whether it appears to me more spin-like or more meaningful, and whether it looks like it's being backed up by actions, and figure out what I feel I ought to do from there.

That trust-deficit is real though. Even if this new communication is sincere and policies are being implemented to back it up, regaining that trust i going to take more than a pretty essay or two and getting the next couple of actions right. It's going to take time -- enough time to establish a solid pattern of getting it right. That is not meant as a "punishment" for having screwed up, or punishment-via-surrogate for Six Apart's sins; it's not (for many, I hope most, of us) from a desire to be vindictive, but it is how this works. Trust, once damaged, takes longer to repair than it took to earn the first time around. We need to see a positive pattern, and we need to feel comfortable in the expectation that the new pattern will continue. I can't see short-circuiting that process as being either easy to convince my fellow users to do or a safe course of action, but at the same time I don't want to sabotage SUP's efforts if they really are going to start doing the right things.

If, on an awake re-reading, it all starts to look like meaningless spin and promises of hot air, the decision regarding what to do about it will be a lot easier, simpler. If it looks like there's real substance there, that's the harder situation to navigate: how much faith to put in a promise when I don't know yet whether it means they've learned what they did wrong or merely learned to be better liars, how much time to give them to do what they're saying, how much to let myself hope. Gosh, this rebuilding-trust thing is uncomfortable for both sides, not just the one that feels they have to work three times as hard to get any credit for getting something right. (It would be easier, simpler, to just say, "hey, they blew it already," and commit to staying angry and vindictive no matter what they get right in the future, and I expect some people will take that easier path. But since my Best Possible Outcome is a healthy LiveJournal (and healthy alternatives!) with a happy community, resolving to stay mad and undermine things to punish SUP regardless of whether they finally start making steps toward what I really wanted, would be counterproductive. Simple, but, well, 'simple', if'n you catch my drift. (Bit also very human.) It's just that giving chance after chance after chance as long as they say "I'm sorry" in the morning, doesn't move things in the right direction either. If this is just spin, we still need to get their attention.

Is the "strike" still justified even if we think the latest message is sincere after we've picked it apart and examined its entrails? I can see an argument for that position. But before I commit to that, I need to examine my own motives carefully to make sure I'm not just rationalizing the Easy Path Of Self-Sustaining Anger. After I examine the official announcement and Mr. Nossik's defense to try to divine whether either of those is what it presents itself as or not.

Which is, I suppose, a pretty long-winded way of saying, "Oh, they wrote something at last. I gotta read that and think about it when I'm more awake to see whether I think it changes anything or not."

(I'd bet that the admins of other sites are noticing, if not actively following, how the LJ-6A-SUP drama is playing out, noting lessons to be learned or reinforced from it and maybe playing Monday-morning-quarterback. I don't know whether most users of other sites, except the ones who, like me, came here and here and here from LiveJournal, particularly care. You can take this whole thing as an abstract musing on trust that happens to be illustrated with a real-world example, or just scroll right past it. If I do manage to get that journal hosting ethics essay put together, that'll be rather less LJ-specific (though it too will use examples from LJ).)

In light of my earlier entry, it seemed important to stay awake long enough to post at least the first two paragraphs of this one.

Mr. Nossik, who was interviewed by the Russian press resulting in the inflammatory article that I linked to a translation of aout twelve hours ago, claims to have been misrepresented: http://anton-nossik.livejournal.com/16069.html

This is an interesting development (and media sometimes do misquote); all the more so in combination with the admission from theljstaff in the latest official post ( (http://community.livejournal.com/lj_2008/3846.html, for folks who don't routinely read all the different places official announcements might be spread across) that the change to the account structure was badly handled and badly communicated ("we didn't follow our own rules, and we apologize").

There are words. Some of the right kinds of words. I'm not certain whether there are the right kinds of actions alongside those words, and I'm too sleepy right now to tease apart what is and isn't 'spin' -- it's something to look at much more closely after I've slept, and re-decide whether to participate in the "strike" or not in light of these latest messages.

Urk. You can probably tell I'm too sleepy, because this entry is starting to get too long. Whoops.

There's certainly a big trust issue here. Even if they're sincere, LJ/SUP is working from a difficult trust-deficit, partly inherited from Six Apart (LJ users, when it comes to trusting official nice-speak and promises: once uh, thrice-or-so bitten, twice shy) and partly increased by their own mistakes. We, well, at least I, don't want to be strung along by round after round of "it'll be better this time honey, I mean it, I promise I won't hit you again" when we should be gettin' out of Dodge ... but at the same time, if they are finally learning from their errors and we might be getting what we wanted (not in every detail of course, but in the broad, important strokes involving communication and respect) 'twould be a shame to spit in their faces just as they're finally shaping up. So I'll read this stuff again when I'm feeling more alert, and sort out whether it appears to me more spin-like or more meaningful, and whether it looks like it's being backed up by actions, and figure out what I feel I ought to do from there.

That trust-deficit is real though. Even if this new communication is sincere and policies are being implemented to back it up, regaining that trust i going to take more than a pretty essay or two and getting the next couple of actions right. It's going to take time -- enough time to establish a solid pattern of getting it right. That is not meant as a "punishment" for having screwed up, or punishment-via-surrogate for Six Apart's sins; it's not (for many, I hope most, of us) from a desire to be vindictive, but it is how this works. Trust, once damaged, takes longer to repair than it took to earn the first time around. We need to see a positive pattern, and we need to feel comfortable in the expectation that the new pattern will continue. I can't see short-circuiting that process as being either easy to convince my fellow users to do or a safe course of action, but at the same time I don't want to sabotage SUP's efforts if they really are going to start doing the right things.

If, on an awake re-reading, it all starts to look like meaningless spin and promises of hot air, the decision regarding what to do about it will be a lot easier, simpler. If it looks like there's real substance there, that's the harder situation to navigate: how much faith to put in a promise when I don't know yet whether it means they've learned what they did wrong or merely learned to be better liars, how much time to give them to do what they're saying, how much to let myself hope. Gosh, this rebuilding-trust thing is uncomfortable for both sides, not just the one that feels they have to work three times as hard to get any credit for getting something right. (It would be easier, simpler, to just say, "hey, they blew it already," and commit to staying angry and vindictive no matter what they get right in the future, and I expect some people will take that easier path. But since my Best Possible Outcome is a healthy LiveJournal (and healthy alternatives!) with a happy community, resolving to stay mad and undermine things to punish SUP regardless of whether they finally start making steps toward what I really wanted, would be counterproductive. Simple, but, well, 'simple', if'n you catch my drift. (Bit also very human.) It's just that giving chance after chance after chance as long as they say "I'm sorry" in the morning, doesn't move things in the right direction either. If this is just spin, we still need to get their attention.

Is the "strike" still justified even if we think the latest message is sincere after we've picked it apart and examined its entrails? I can see an argument for that position. But before I commit to that, I need to examine my own motives carefully to make sure I'm not just rationalizing the Easy Path Of Self-Sustaining Anger. After I examine the official announcement and Mr. Nossik's defense to try to divine whether either of those is what it presents itself as or not.

Which is, I suppose, a pretty long-winded way of saying, "Oh, they wrote something at last. I gotta read that and think about it when I'm more awake to see whether I think it changes anything or not."

(I'd bet that the admins of other sites are noticing, if not actively following, how the LJ-6A-SUP drama is playing out, noting lessons to be learned or reinforced from it and maybe playing Monday-morning-quarterback. I don't know whether most users of other sites, except the ones who, like me, came here and here and here from LiveJournal, particularly care. You can take this whole thing as an abstract musing on trust that happens to be illustrated with a real-world example, or just scroll right past it. If I do manage to get that journal hosting ethics essay put together, that'll be rather less LJ-specific (though it too will use examples from LJ).)

"Mind you, it need not be Christmas that's being celebrated -- there is some precedent for Easter having a tree, though I suspect the ornaments might be too Goth for most of us to deal with." -- -- twistedchick, 2006-12-17

[Let's see ... today is Ostara and also Maundy Tuesday (so Easter is just around the corner), the vernal eqinox occurred at 1:48 EDT (5:48 UT), Mawlid an Nabi started last night, and Purim and Naw Ruz start at sundown today. Is there a better time for the general greeting, "Happy Holidays!"?]

"Mind you, it need not be Christmas that's being celebrated -- there is some precedent for Easter having a tree, though I suspect the ornaments might be too Goth for most of us to deal with." -- -- twistedchick, 2006-12-17

[Let's see ... today is Ostara and also Maundy Tuesday (so Easter is just around the corner), the vernal eqinox occurred at 1:48 EDT (5:48 UT), Mawlid an Nabi started last night, and Purim and Naw Ruz start at sundown today. Is there a better time for the general greeting, "Happy Holidays!"?]

Whoops -- in the list of holidays under this morning's quote of the day (where I typoed (or 'thinkoed') Tuesday when I meant Thursday), I completely forgot to mention that today is also Wear A Sweater In Honor Of Mister Rogers day!

Whoops -- in the list of holidays under this morning's quote of the day (where I typoed (or 'thinkoed') Tuesday when I meant Thursday), I completely forgot to mention that today is also Wear A Sweater In Honor Of Mister Rogers day!

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.

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.