I've made up my mind, I ain't wasting no more time

[venta]

I've been thinking for a while that perhaps I ought to explain how I use Livejournal, because it seems to be different to some people's expectations. Then I noticed yesterday that chrisvenus had published a similar thing, and it spurred me to get on with it.

Venta's LJ Manifesto

1. I don't read LJ reliably. If I'm away, or busy, or distracted, I don't make sure that I read every post that every one of my friends makes. Don't assume that, just because you posted something to your journal, I've read it. If I miss a party/invite/bit of gossip because of this, that's my lookout. However, if you actually want or need me to know something you've posted - point it out! I do read any comment posted to my own journal. Hell, I even read my email if you're feeling old-skool; address is in the user info.

I've said that before, and I'm going to say it just once more in case there's anyone who still hasn't got it: Just because you've posted something to your journal, don't assume I've read it.

2. I don't make friends-only posts. If you've ever wondered why I don't like you enough to add you to any of my filters, it's because I don't have any. If there's anything I don't feel able to post publicly, then I'm not putting it on the internet.

3. My friends list is simply a list of journals I'd like to have presented to me to read. If I've added you to it, it's either because you're someone I know and want to keep up with, or because I've found your journal interesting. I don't, as a rule, automatically add back people who add me - this is not an indication that I think they're boring or I'm not interested, I'm just trying to keep the number of journals I'm trying to read under control. Since all my posts are public, not being on my friends list has no further effects.

4. I have as much time for my friends who are not on LJ as for those who are. Anyone posting stuff on my journal referring to non-LJers as freaks/second-class citizens gets a slap. It's a blog-hosting site, not a religion.

5. I try not to write anything about other people that they wouldn't be happy to have posted on a publicly accessible site. In some cases, this is nothing at all. I try to refer to people by their LJ usernames if they have them, or by one name only if they don't; I don't use full names. My journal is marked as non-googlable.

If I've ever written something about you which you aren't happy to have posted, or about a third party which you think they'd object to, please tell me.

Comments

Title

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

You did that on purpose ! (And anyway - not too keen on that one...)

Re: Title

[venta.livejournal.com]

Yeah, you missed yesterday's too :)

Re: Title

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Now you've made that comment I can work out what it's supposed to be... but I have to say I never knew those were the words !

Re: Title

[venta.livejournal.com]

Fair enough - I think that's about the only line out of Walk This Way that I can identify :)

I think it'll be back to Aerosmith or Faster Pussycat for the rest of the week - I've exhausted my Whitensake repertoire now !

Though I'm sure Whitesnake are probably big enough to have had more than one "known" song. Are there others ?

Re: Title

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Not so much. I expect 'Crying in the Rain' would be up there somewhere, but again it's a bit blah.

Their better stuff is very bluesy, which isn't really what they're known for. The best known album (barring compilations) is '1987', which is their penultimate one and the last one was mostly rubbish.

Also, TBH, their lyrics are generally awful. Great tunes, great playing, great singer... really crass lyrics. Trouble is, I can't imagine David Coverdale singing Divine Comedy lyrics with quite the same passion !

Re: Title

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

Are there others ?

Fool For Your Loving, I'd have said.

[strange-complex.livejournal.com]

Anyone posting stuff on my journal referring to non-LJers as freaks/second-class citizens gets a slap

People do this? I'm glad I haven't come across it!

My journal is marked as non-googlable

You can do this? I'm not totally sure I want to, as, like you, I'm keen on my journal being publicly accessible, and I like that to include people randomly searching the web for information about the Saturnalia, etc. But it'd be useful to know how, in case I decide I do.

In general, very sensible rules, and much in line with my own approach. The only differences being that I do occasionally make friends-only posts in order to talk about stuff I'm happy about my friends seeing, but not my parents (since they do know where my LJ is), and I do have filters based around what places people live in so that I can e.g. invite my Belfast friends out to the cinema without people in America having to read about it.

[venta.livejournal.com]

People do this? I'm glad I haven't come across it!

They do. Some more so that others.

[Making a journal non-searchable]

Go to your user info, and hit the "edit the info page" link.

Check the box that says "Block Robots/Spiders from indexing your journal".

[strange-complex.livejournal.com]

Oh! Doh! In that case, I have already done it. I thought that meant I was stopping spam people from picking up stuff like email addresses from it. Maybe it means both?

Hmm, now I have to think about whether I want to undo it...

[venta.livejournal.com]

I think it does both - I believe google's little gnomes crawl round the web picking stuff up in the same way that spammers (and their little gnomes) do.

I'm not 100% sure, but I'm sure someone will happen along and correct me :)

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Naughty spammers (and is there any other sort ?) are unlikely to respect robots.txt files !

[venta.livejournal.com]

Naughty spammers (and is there any other sort ?)

I believe they're also available in Pesky these days.

[zotz]

The big search engines do, and they're the only ones with the resources to index much of the web.

Google have just announced how they're going to stop indexing blog-comment spam like those Passion-Of-The-Christ comments, incidentally.

[broadmeadow.livejournal.com]

Indeed. Incidentally, robots.txt is also honoured by the wayback machine (www.archive.org (wwww.archive.org)) and applied retrospectively so that all archives of your site will disappear next time it gets to you, if you tell it to keep out. I'm not sure if those archives will come back if you allow it in again in the future.

[broadmeadow.livejournal.com]

Bad Link! To your bed!

Try this one instead: www.archive.org (http://www.archive.org)

[wimble.livejournal.com]

It doesn't actively block web-crawlers. It just sends a message to all web clients, effectively saying "if you're a robot, please go away." Some clients may ignore this, or their robotness, and carry on anyway.

Note there's something... ah. http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/19/0516246&tid=111&tid=217
Essentially, this is google asking for a new attribute, so they can differentiate links made in blogs from those in "genuine pages". And then ignore the blog links when they're calculating page rank.
This is entirely different (despite having a high proportion of the same keywords) from the indexing you're referring to.

[bateleur.livejournal.com]

Re: that article - Since Six Apart now own LJ, the implication is that LJ will soon do this automatically (ie. add nofollow to links in comments).

[wimble.livejournal.com]

I'd expect that LJ would do this automatically, irrespective of the Six Apart purchase.

Has that gone through, incidentally? I thought it was still part of the rumour mill.

[ar-gemlad.livejournal.com]

Yep it has apparently.
http://www.livejournal.com/users/news/

[onebyone.livejournal.com]

I'm slightly surprised they aren't already doing it today - Google didn't wake up this morning and invent rel="nofollow". But I guess the LJ people have had other things on their minds, not least the server crash.

[zotz]

Yes, Google's little spiders crawl around the web every night taking notes. Except for the bits that tell them not to come in.

Wait a minute...

[j4.livejournal.com]

(Damn you & your earworms!!)

I don't, as a rule, automatically add back people who add me - this is not an indication that I think they're boring or I'm not interested, I'm just trying to keep the number of journals I'm trying to read under control.

I don't use filters for posting, but I do use them for reading -- so I add most people who've friended me to my flist, but I'm selective about who I add to my default view (i.e. what I actually read). I figure it doesn't cost me anything to add 'em back & it makes me look popular it hopefully makes them happy. :-)

[addedentry.livejournal.com]

Sensible, but less a manifesto than an explanation. I expected you to write something along the lines of:

1. I will post between 3 and 5 times each week.
   
2. Each post will ask something of my readership, either a fact or an opinion.
   
3. Each title will be a song lyric, which may or may not be related to the current music.
   
4. I will introduce at least one northern idiom per week.
   

[venta.livejournal.com]

Fair point.

As some may have guessed, the only reason for using the word manifesto at all was to wedge in a Sultans of Ping lyric.

[bloodnok.livejournal.com]

I've made up my mind, I ain't wasting no more time

Whitesnake? *g*

[venta.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid so, but for a good reason (http://www.livejournal.com/users/venta/131486.html?thread=1907102#t1907102) :)