are we oppressed now?

[krickets]

Am I a scab if I don't strike? Countdowns to tend to and all.

Comments

[bachlava.livejournal.com]

No, you're not. A small percentage of users going quiet for 24 hours? No effect whatsoever.

[lostashleigh.livejournal.com]

Of course you wouldn't be a scab! ;)

What is all this about? :S

[gregoria44.livejournal.com]

Yet more knickers in knots.

Such things only work if everyone co-operates, and that just ain't gonna happen, so countdown away!

It's not like there'll be a picket line to cross. If there is, they'll be breaking their own rules...

[mistojen.livejournal.com]

Nah, I'm not striking. It isn't going to change anything or bother LJ at all, or anything.

[dazzlebug.livejournal.com]

Qu'est-ce que le point?

Dude. Screw that. I ain't striking from LJ for a whole day!! Where would my sanity sleep? That's so stupid. I don't even know WHAT they're striking over; I like LJ, I use it, I don't really care about the Admin side or wtfever unless it directly affects me.

Elaborate if you know more, please?

[inthekeyofd.livejournal.com]

Unless I'm not around that day, I'm not striking, and I'm not sure there are even a lot of people doing it, so don't feel bad.

[crickets.livejournal.com]

Yeah, my theory too. I guess maybe because I'm a paid user my perspective is a bit different. I guess I do feel that livejournal is an excellent service that I'm willing to pay for, rather than something I put up with and yet am entitled to have ad-free. And is that really what it's about? Or is it about the censoring of the interests in their reports? You can still list those as interests and search for communities that list them as well, so I guess I just don't see the big deal about that. *sigh* It's certainly nothing to get up in arms about, IMO.

[crickets.livejournal.com]

People are mad that livejournal took away basic accounts and I guess they're also mad that they're censoring their top interests page as well. Which you can see . (http://stewardess.livejournal.com/288147.html)

[crickets.livejournal.com]

Yet more knickers in knots.

Hee. Exactly.

[crickets.livejournal.com]

Well I mean, I guess if I felt like it was something I cared about, I'd probably strike whether or not I felt it would do any good. But it's just not something I really care that much about. After the year of foibles, these latest two developments are really nothing I'm worried about at all.

[crickets.livejournal.com]

I'm quoting myself. People are mad that livejournal took away basic accounts first of all. And they're also upset that they're censoring the top interests page as well. Which you can see an analysis of here (http://stewardess.livejournal.com/288147.html). Funny thing, I never even knew the top interests page existed before now. So why care?

[lostashleigh.livejournal.com]

Drama, Drama, Drama!

I'm happy with LJ, but I did go for a paid account too so maybe that voids my opinion! I don't suppose LJ will care and we'd be the ones missing out from using so...

[crickets.livejournal.com]

Yeah I'm not really planning on it. It looks like a lot of people aren't either.

[dazzlebug.livejournal.com]

Heh, neither did I! I just find it hilarious that LJ is so important to some people that they feel the need to strike over it. Y'hellooo, it's a website, people. Why not strike over something REALLY important?

[greycoupon.livejournal.com]

I had never knew that existed either.

If you say SUP is homophobic in really BIG text it means more. This is rather hilarious,

[crickets.livejournal.com]

Well it doesn't make a whole lot of sense ANYWAY. Even if you say that the advertisers are the homophobic ones and not SUP. Advertisers should know that "the gays" have more disposable income since they typically don't raise children. Or, I should say, a vast majority don't in comparison to heterosexual couples.

Not that I'm worried about it. LOL. If I was, I'd strike along with the rest.