Add a "locked" option to subscription filters

[cesy]

Title:
Add a "locked" option to subscription filters

Area:
subscription filters, reading page

Summary:
Add an "is locked" option to subscription filters

Description:
(Original LJ suggestion: http://community.livejournal.com/suggestions/818998.html)

In the new subscription filters, add an option to "Show only content that ..." with a drop-down to choose either "is locked" or "is public" (or possibly just an "is locked" tickbox.)

This would be useful for those people who read on a public computer where they don't want to log in, and then later (on a private computer, logged in) want to catch up on the access-locked entries they missed, without having to scan through all the public entries as well.

Poll #1210 Add a "locked" option to subscription filters

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 34

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
27 (79.4%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (5.9%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
5 (14.7%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Comments

[yvi]

Might be good to have an 'not' option for some of the filters. I haven't yet played with them, though, so maybe it's already possible to do things like "person X's posts that are not tagged Y or Z"?

[cesy]

Yes, the tags bit already has "all", "any" or "none" of the selected tags, though no fancy boolean stuff beyond that.

[yvi]

I just had a look at this and... do you mean setting this universally for a filter or for individual users?

[cesy]

I think either could work. For most use-cases, setting it for a whole filter would cover it. For individual users offers slightly more flexibility, but also means a lot more clicks for the most common use-case.