liz_marcs: (Faith_Oh_Shit)
liz_marcs ([personal profile] liz_marcs) wrote2010-09-04 02:51 pm

FYI: There is no cross-posting here...

FYI to anyone who is nervous:

I will NOT be cross-posting to Facebook nor Twitter under any circumstances whatsoever.

On the Facebook front:

I hate Facebook with the passion of a thousand firey nuns, but I have one under my RL name to maintain my link to professional contacts, hometown contacts, and family members. If I had a better option, I'd take it and run.

While I'm not exactly posting porn here, my involvement in fanfiction (even as mainstream vanilla as my fanfiction tends to be) would result in some veeeeeeery uncomfortable questions. While I've made the switch from publishing to the Jolly Green Giant (which more resembles Better of Ted in sheer geeky quirky-ness on some days), I spent most of my professional life in publishing, I still have professional contacts in that field, and there's always a chance I'll end up back in that biz at some point before I die. So linking my RL identity to my LJ one? Aaaaaawwwwwk-ward to explain, to say the least.

Needless to say, Facebook will NOT be linked to this LJ. Ever.


On the Twitter front:

I don't have Twitter since I don't see the need for it. Unless I'm compelled to do so for professional reasons (which is a possibility), I have no plans on getting one.

If that does happen, all my reasons for not linking to Facebook would hold equally true for Twitter.


My Guarantee to You: I will not be linking my comments to Facebook or Twitter

As I haven't given LJ any Twitter or Facebook information, this is not a hard promise to keep. To double your security, I've even removed the option to do so at my end by installing a Greasemonkey script (instructions here) that hides the options in my browser.

I'd also install the CSS script to remove it from the LJ end, but I know shit-all about CSS script and where to put the stupid thing. The instructions aren't exactly enlightening on that front. As soon as I figure it out, though, I will be installing the script to make this LJ more secure.


Unpopular Time: I am using Pingbacks

If the notification was public, I'd disable them in a heartbeat. However, the notification comes in as a screened comment, and I like having the information just as an FYI for me. (I've lost count how many times people have stumbled across this LJ because of "some old post" they came across on their FList.)

You will never see who is linking to me, nor will you be outed as linking to me if you chose to do so. However, I thought it fair warning to put this out there since I will be using this feature.


You know, back in the day I created my online Lizbeth Marcs persona so that I could freely gallivant around teh Internets and participate in whatever I wanted without fear of RL or professional repercussions.

End result? Lizbeth Marcs as a very, very, very long history on the Internet (Google never forgets), and my online history with my RL name is very, very, very small. There are only a handful of people I've interacted with online who know my real name, for which I am very, very, very grateful.

Turns out in the long run, using a nom de Internet and being vigilant about keeping my parallel lives separate was the smartest thing I've ever done.

(Anonymous) 2010-09-04 07:22 pm (UTC)(link)
Importantly, using a pseudonym that passes as a real name works much better. People are happy to assume it is a real name, so you get all the advantages of trust in real person, but none of the disadvantages of being that person.

I actually admire people who can and have succesfully separated their IDs and kept them so. I can't do it, never have been able to.

Which is why I always use my real name, that works as a constant reminder to me that it's being archived.

PEople are objecting to pingbacks? I know they're buggy, again, shouldn't have been released without proper testing, again, and everything, but finding out who's linking to a post is easy, some blogs even have it built into the template itself.

I get the Facebook crossover thing, but pingbacks? Ah well, my use case compared to most peoples use case is fradically different, but I'm nowhere near as unusual as some seem to think.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-09-04 07:22 pm (UTC)(link)
Importantly, using a pseudonym that passes as a real name works much better. People are happy to assume it is a real name, so you get all the advantages of trust in real person, but none of the disadvantages of being that person.

I actually admire people who can and have succesfully separated their IDs and kept them so. I can't do it, never have been able to.

Which is why I always use my real name, that works as a constant reminder to me that it's being archived.

PEople are objecting to pingbacks? I know they're buggy, again, shouldn't have been released without proper testing, again, and everything, but finding out who's linking to a post is easy, some blogs even have it built into the template itself.

I get the Facebook crossover thing, but pingbacks? Ah well, my use case compared to most peoples use case is fradically different, but I'm nowhere near as unusual as some seem to think.

[identity profile] liz-marcs.livejournal.com 2010-09-04 07:34 pm (UTC)(link)
Ha-ha-ha! For sure, using a name that sounds real is a huuuuge help.

As for the pingbacks, I can see some of the objection because the pingback happens even if you're posting a link in a locked post. Granted the person who gets the pingback and clicks can't actually see the entire post itself, but I can see why people would be uncomfortable with that, especially given the potential for wank to happen. That's why I'd disable the pingbacks if they weren't hidden, and that's the only reason why I'd do it.

That's not to say that there isn't a potential for wank, hidden pingback notifications or not. If you post a link in a locked post, you're trusting the journal-holder to not out you. Plus, grudges in fandom can go on for decades and can burst out of hiding at any time.

Overall, my reasoning on pingbacks is exactly like yours: Just about every blogging/journal service has it built into the code, so I don't see where it's necessarily a big deal, especially if you wind up getting linked "off service" so to speak.

[identity profile] wrenlet.livejournal.com 2010-09-04 07:41 pm (UTC)(link)
The pingback bot also quotes a chunk of the linking post in its screened comment (http://rivkat.dreamwidth.org/281544.html), which I think is what's harshing most people's mellow about this. It's currently unclear whether this is true if the entry was ALWAYS private, but it will do so if the entry was EVER public.

Whole mess has LJ's typical UTTER LACK OF TESTING written all over it.
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

[personal profile] matgb 2010-09-04 11:05 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, quoted exerpts are a normal part of the pingback protocol, but they've got some very buggy code, it's not supposed to do anything with locked posts, at all, and I've not seen evidence that it is pinging from locked posts.

I've seen evidence that it's pinging from posts that are public and edited to be locked, but that's a completely different thing, if you ever post something publcly, it's in the wild, aggregators and dodgy search engines pick it up, I know I've been linked to on posts that were later locked, they showed up in my link tracking Google Alerts.

But yeah, sucky testing, I really don't get why the release such major new features without much user testing. But then, I switched to DW a year ago.

Annoyingly, I like the actual idea behind the feature, including the comment posting, but not from locke dentries, that's just stupid.

[identity profile] wrenlet.livejournal.com 2010-09-05 02:29 am (UTC)(link)
Here's a good rundown of results from various test cases. (http://helens78.dreamwidth.org/860769.html) I realize anything that's been publicly accessible on the web for so much as a fraction of a second is probably archived somewhere, but the oddities in the pingback behavior still make it seem poorly thought-out and even more poorly bug-tested.

(Facebook can bite me entirely. Rrar.)

[identity profile] midnightfae.livejournal.com 2010-09-05 02:08 am (UTC)(link)
Just to confirm for you. It does not remove the ticky boxes if you're viewing in your own style (I know, because I can see them.).

[identity profile] spiralleds.livejournal.com 2010-09-05 03:38 am (UTC)(link)
Wow. That seems to work. Thank you for the solution.

[identity profile] iyalode.livejournal.com 2010-09-05 04:00 am (UTC)(link)
I am increasingly happy regarding my zero exposure on fb/twitter as time goes on. I work in a very tech savvy industry, as a result both me and my flist's privacy is a concern and something I'm very much aware of, to the point that I changed online persona sometime ago and have only ever referred to it once since.

So, long story short, I'm totally on board with what you've said above.