why I'm here

[calimac]

A recent comment on one of my posts said that, in contrast to LJ, "I find Fb does a better job *for me* of keeping me in loose contact with a lot of different people," emphasis added as if I might disagree.

Of course I don't disagree. FB does do a better job of keeping people in touch; that's because more of the relevant people are active there. If they were on LJ, LJ would do better.

I wasn't attracted to FB in the first place, before it became popular (and long before I learned of the company's ghastly attitude to customer privacy), because it has such a lousy platform. By which I mean things like the strict limitation of post length, the awkward placement of longer follow-ups, the lack of archives. LJ can do short posts, and many people do; but they don't have to. LJ archives don't disappear, but you don't have to look at them if you don't want to. It seems to me that one of these platforms satisfies multiple needs, and the other only satisfies some.

The other reason I'm still here is because I already am. To a degree, that's generated by "Please don't make me learn another interface if I don't have to," but mostly it reflects my character. I'm loyal; I stick to the tried and true; if I'm not totally dissatisfied I don't drop it to run after the new and shiny. I came online in 1991 at the suggestion of sartorias to join GEnie, and I stuck with GEnie to the very end. (When was that, 2000 or 2001?) I was literally still online at the moment they pulled the plug. After that I didn't have a regular online home until I joined LJ in 2004.

This principle works in other areas of my life. Since the topic of the discussion where this came up was retaining new members in the Mythopoeic Society, it's relevant that it's the reason I'm still in the Mythopoeic Society after 35 years. I've been with B. for 24 years. I have no interest in running after something new and shiny.

If I thought FB would last (and if it weren't so irritating to read, and if its management weren't so malignant), I might be tempted, but I don't want to keep chasing flocks of birds as they flit to the next thing and the next. If they'd come back to LJ, they'd find a system that can do everything FB does and do it better, and then we'd all be happy.

Comments

[lynn-maudlin.livejournal.com]

I guess I don't see much corollary between a commitment to a particular technological platform (e.g., I've never understood the Apple-fanboy thing: "great, you really like your Mac... uh, why does that require you make rude noises about my nonMac?!") and commitment to a group which is comprised of friends and friends-waiting-to-be-known. But clearly we are different, the way we internalize and process such things; I also struggled over leaving the Council of Stewards (after my first nearly-10-year run) but I wouldn't have compared it to a romantic breakup. So I'm sorry to disappoint you by not seeing LJ as comparable in essence, except for the number of participants - but I suspect that's where I'm more sensitive, seeing many essential differences between the two platforms, most of which you don't see (not having learned the other platform; I don't know anyway around that one).

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

There is no corollary. You're connecting the wrong parts of the analogies. The Mythopoeic Society is a collection of particular people in a particular context. LJ is a collection of particular people on a particular platform. If my LJ friends move to a less desirable platform, I'm torn; I like the people, but I don't like where they've gone. If Mythies drop the Society in favor of ... well, actually, in the late 70s a lot of the early Mythies did drop the Society in favor of Star Trek and Star Wars fandom, shows I don't consider 1% as good or enjoyable as Tolkien and Lewis (though a lot of energy was spent trying to prove that they were, just as some praise the FB platform now), I wasn't going to follow them there either. Because it's not just the people, it's the context as well. I love my Christian friends, but I'm not going to join their churches either.

I can't do anything about the fact that you've mischaracterized some features of LJ ("my friends' list on LJ takes me off the main page to read the whole post" - that's only true if they use a cut tag, which on my FL is rare, and if the post is long and cut, you don't have to follow it and read it if you don't have the time, same as you don't have to read an FB Note; and if you don't like moving off the main LJ FL page, you can open a new tab; I do that all the time, and I really see no fundamental difference between that and the balloon expansion that FB uses - see, I really do know something about how the FB platform works - same thing is true for making a comment; and, if you dislike LJ's advertisements but like the glitter on other websites, you can customize Adblock; in fact, that's how Adblock works: you point to something specific and say "I don't want to see any of those any more").

But regardless of whether the contrast between the platforms is fair, that may be the reason why you prefer the FB platform, but it's not the reason that "Fb does a better job *for me* of keeping me in loose contact with a lot of different people." FB does that for the reason I said: because the people are there. If you had few friends on FB, it couldn't keep you in contact with them. If they were on LJ, LJ would keep you in contact with them, and all the long posts and cut tags in the world wouldn't prevent that. In fact it didn't.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Ha. Nobody actually likes using Facebook, it says here. (Nobody? That sounds extreme. Still, that's what it says.) They use it because ... everybody else is there.

[lynn-maudlin.livejournal.com]

But that's a false comparison - ask the same people, do they prefer using Fb or LJ? I suspect "nobody actually likes using Fb" is about all the things we complain about ("they keep changing it" or "privacy policies change and I don't know how it make it the way I want it" etc.) - but put those same people WITH ALL THEIR FRIENDS on LJ and I don't think most of them would prefer the LJ platform.

For me it's kind of like the Mac vs PC debates... it's okay to prefer a platform; it's a little crazy to think folks who disagree are stupid or ignorant or just don't know better.

But you've never addressed my preferences: why hide behind screen-names unrelated to your real identity? Why limit photos and profile pics? (because LJ wants you to PAY to have more). There are a lot of little elements which add up to a strong preference for the FB platform, *for me* - it's icing on the cake that more people are over there. I think you need to consider the possibility that more people joined FB because they like that platform and found it did "enough stuff they wanted" to make them bother to join and learn the platform - that just didn't happen with LJ.