Links List on switching layouts

[sharpiefan]

Title:
Links List on switching layouts

Area:
links lists

Summary:
If a user has more than 10 links (including blank spaces for headers) in their links list, on switching layouts, a user loses links 11 onwards. Could there be some way to change things so that a user doesn't lose links?

Description:
If a user has more than 10 links (including blank spaces for headers) in their links list, on switching layouts, a user loses links 11 onwards. Could there be some way to change things so that a user doesn't lose links? I recently changed layouts, not realising that I'd lose a good portion of my links list in doing so, and I don't suppose I'm the only one - and I don't know if there's any way to go back and get them again.

Poll #8392 Links List on switching layouts

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 53

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
40 (75.5%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
12 (22.6%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (1.9%)

Not-Publicly-Identified Commenting

[azurelunatic]

Title:
Not-Publicly-Identified Commenting

Area:
comments, anonymous comments

Summary:
Comments where the username of the commenter is visible to the journal owner and/or community admins, but no one else. Journal owners/admins would be able to control this like any other commenting option, but would not be able to make the comment publicly display the username after the fact.

Description:
Assuming the journal owner has allowed it, a commenter would be able to select "Do not identify me publicly" (or some much smoother phrase) as an option when commenting, so that their comment is displayed as anonymous to everyone but the journal owner (or the community's admins).

This would allow many of the benefits of an anonymous discussion taking place in the public sphere (people who cannot for whatever reason allow their opinions or experiences to be traced to their Dreamwidth identity as far as the public is concerned) but would also allow the people moderating the discussion to confirm at least relative identity. (In a recent high-profile discussion, one person in the publishing industry was accepting comments by email to post anonymously with a description of that person's authority to be saying what they said.) It would also allow people to correct typographical errors or delete things that they had second thoughts about.

The commenter would have to trust that the journal owner/admin would not "out" them, which could be done deliberately (think screenshot), accidentally (referring to a person by name in a reply), or inadvertently (using information that they didn't think would be identifying, but was known to a third party witnessing the discussion). The commenter would also have to be careful of not sharing sufficient information to out themselves, and not anon-failing (posting fully identified in a forum where they had previously been posting anonymously).

This would be a possible workable way of allowing anonymity into locked entries. The usual problems with allowing anonymous comments on locked entries are mostly social - the journal owner would know that it's a small pool of potential commenters and can play matching games; the entry might be restricted to a very specific security group, such that someone might think themselves anonymous and comment, but could be the only person in the security group and therefore identifiable. However, with knowledge that their identity is visible only to the journal owner/admin(s), someone could comment "anonymously" with a more informed mindset (though fellows in the pool of people given access might still figure them out based on the fact that access is listed in the profile).

This would be great for anonymous games (anonymemes, kink memes, darkrooms, the pride thread). It would preserve accountability while retaining at least some part of the anything-goes spirit.

This was inspired by a locked discussion about drug use and abuse, which could possibly have used a feature like this. We're all there because we know the journal owner, not because we trust each other necessarily.

Poll #8393 Not-Publicly-Identified Commenting

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 84

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
44 (52.4%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
20 (23.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
7 (8.3%)

(I have no opinion)
13 (15.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)