Log in

No account? Create an account
21 August 2008 @ 09:32 pm
Meeting on 27th June 2008  
Meeting on 27th June 2008 (minutes not yet approved by Advisory Board)

Members Attending

Danah Boyd, Jen Brady, Esther Dyson, Brad Fitzpatrick, Zafar Khashimov, Larry Lessig

Management Attending

Andrew Paulson, Matthew Berardo, Sergei Komarov, Edward Shenderovich, Benjamin Wegg-Prosser, Marina Pustilnik


Annelies van den Belt

1. Approval of minutes from meeting of 25th April 2008 in San Francisco
* Agreed
2. Welcome to new members
* The two new user representatives made short introductions and welcomed on the board following their elections in May
3. User policy update
* The revised policy relating to the publishing of inappropriate content online where the legality was borderline was discussed. An update to the policy was circulated and discussed – The statement which Management circulated was agreed.
* It was suggest that contact should be made with relevant NGOs who will be able to advise on issues surrounding the publication of potentially illegal material – Management to pursue
* Discussion on communities that promote potentially harmful lifestyle choices was discussed. A research project was proposed which would look into this issue in more detail. The results of this project should be available by end of summer – Management to pursue
4. Account structure
* Discussion followed the potential changes to the LiveJournal account structure which were discussed at the previous meeting. Concerns were expressed regarding the reaction from users about displaying advertising in Basic Accounts. Management emphasized that nothing was cast in stone and final agreement would only be reached after thorough consultation with users – Management to develop further plans in light of comments from Board

o Board members suggested that more information be given on the financial position of LiveJournal to justify the proposed changes - Management said they would consider but emphasized that LiveJournal had wide range of views on the relevance of LiveJournals’ financial position in relation to this issue.

5. Advisory Board communications

o Board members expressed concern about the proliferation of LiveJournal official communities – Management made clear that refining these was an important part of plan to update LiveJournal

6. Any other business

o Board members asked at which point it would be appropriate to discuss issues relating to the account structure in public – Management asked members to respect confidentiality of discussion until after public announcement.

7. Next meeting

o Advisory Board General Meeting –November, San Francisco (TBC)

Post script – the date and venue of the Advisory Board General Meeting has been changed due to scheduling issues.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( Post a new comment )
Imariaimaria on August 28th, 2008 11:26 pm (UTC)
For those of us who are not aware, could we have titles listed somewhere for the members who were voted in? I'm afraid I do not recognize the real names of the voted representatives.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
~ Dawna ~dawna on August 28th, 2008 11:38 pm (UTC)

the list of who is who is on this page :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - imaria on August 29th, 2008 12:06 am (UTC)
Paulits_paul on August 29th, 2008 12:21 am (UTC)
Because I'm not really smart with this type of thing.

1) How do we go about contacting our user rep.?

2) How do we go about getting something scheduled to be discussed at the next board meeting?

Thanks muchly.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
jamethjameth on August 29th, 2008 06:45 am (UTC)
You may contact me! I am wide open.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - schonste on August 31st, 2008 03:35 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - marta on September 3rd, 2008 05:01 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - octalbunny on September 3rd, 2008 08:08 pm (UTC)
In Love With a Monkey Made of Ragsmaidenmorticia on August 29th, 2008 01:49 am (UTC)
so, are *we* going to be able see results of the study on communities which "promote potentially harmful lifestyle choices"? Let alone the outline for the study? Methodology? Who is conducting the study? What questions/framework was/is being used?

And, by the by, I note that it's nearly the end of the summer now, so is the report available?

xo M,
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
shadowchild on August 29th, 2008 02:58 pm (UTC)
Also wondering about this, and really hoping the people in said communities will have/had a chance to weigh in and give their perspectives.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
Fair and Balanced Blogger: LMMDNRrhonan on August 29th, 2008 02:31 am (UTC)
There are many of us who recognize how open to abuse and manipulation the election was. Is there going to be any discussion regarding ensuring that any such future elections are not open to ballot box stuffing? Such as limiting the vote to only those who are permanent members, early adopters, and currently paid members? That would both quiet accusations that the current rep was only elected because of an army of sock-puppets, and would also generate revenue for LJ.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
theblanky on August 29th, 2008 04:37 am (UTC)
I don't think limiting it to people who can afford to pay for LJ is the right solution to the problem. A change may need to be made, but taking away the voice of all non-paid members isn't something I would support unless the "user representative" was changed to "paid user representative" to make it clear that they do not represent all users, but only the ones who can afford to have a vote.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - rhonan on August 30th, 2008 05:18 am (UTC)
(no subject) - theblanky on August 30th, 2008 06:42 am (UTC)
(no subject) - rhonan on August 30th, 2008 03:56 pm (UTC)
the ill-tempered cavalier: icongillen on August 29th, 2008 03:14 am (UTC)
Could you refrain from using the passive voice in these minutes and identify Board and Management members when recognizing their comments and suggestions?
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
Carriecelesmaxwell on August 29th, 2008 03:59 am (UTC)
Can we please get SOME kind of forum for contacting our "elected" representative and finding out what her plans are?
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
YES WE CAN HAS!: MST3KJournalaaangyl on August 29th, 2008 04:49 am (UTC)
I'm probably posting this in the wrong place but honestly all the Official LJ communities really are confusing and I've been kinda hoping the LJ-rep could be a channel for bringing good user ideas to the LJ-business end.

The webhost DreamHost has this great section where they have a list of feature requests from their users. The users get a certain number of "vote points" to work with, and each feature available costs a number of points relative to how difficult it is to develop. The users can then go and "spend" their points to "vote" up the features they value most, and this allows the dev team to make strong priority choices based on what customers actually want.

I would absolutely love to see such a system on LJ, perhaps where paid/perm accounts are allowed more "vote points" on account of they're actually paid customers. Such a system is very helpful in determining prioritization and opening a sort-of-dialogue between devs and users that doesn't leave room for whining and useless flaming.

Thanks for listening.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
Lotripper: corsetmsilverstar on August 29th, 2008 06:05 am (UTC)
Even the official minutes make it clear that the Management deflected many of the Board members' concerns and questions. That's disturbing, because that's the whole point of an Advisory Board: to help the Management deal with the hard questions of running a social networking system.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
jameth: jameth 08 upside downjameth on August 29th, 2008 06:43 am (UTC)
Reporting in.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 29th, 2008 06:58 am (UTC)
(no subject) - shutter on August 29th, 2008 09:45 am (UTC)
(no subject) - jameth on January 20th, 2009 04:26 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - jameth on January 20th, 2009 04:37 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - shutter on January 20th, 2009 08:14 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - jameth on January 20th, 2009 04:26 pm (UTC)
mackiedockiemackiedockie on August 29th, 2008 08:12 am (UTC)
The blinking, crass, rotohog ad polluting my basic account is egregious. Maybe not as egregious as plentyoffish, but damn close.
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 29th, 2008 11:30 am (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 29th, 2008 02:59 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 29th, 2008 11:40 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 30th, 2008 01:49 am (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on September 7th, 2008 12:32 am (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on September 10th, 2008 11:23 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on September 11th, 2008 01:48 am (UTC)
(no subject) - marta on September 11th, 2008 02:50 am (UTC)
Delara: Catdelara on August 29th, 2008 03:19 pm (UTC)
Are Advisory Board members going to read (and maybe even respond) to comments and concerns, or is this yet another part of LJ where feedback appears to be worthless? Just curious. LJ has developed a pretty nice track record of seemingly not giving a damn what their users think...
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
John "FuzzFace" McMahon: LJ Advisory Board - 2008 Votefuzzface00 on August 29th, 2008 10:01 pm (UTC)
A couple of suggestions:

a) The use of acronyms, no matter how obvious, should be avoided in future meeting reports. Not everyone knows the same acronyms that the writer does.
b) The user community will not see benefit in short bullet points and information shrouded behind non-disclosure agreements. If these minutes are to communicate what is going on, they need more detail.
c) It would be nice to know how people are attending meetings (e.g. In Person versus Conference Call), length of the meetings and the agenda.
d) Try to avoid statements that will just beg the next question. For example: 'When and Where is the General Meeting now?' immediately came to mind because of the "Post script".
e) The turn around time for this information needs to be speedier. Two months to get minutes out is going to make people think the process is broken.

(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - (Anonymous) on August 29th, 2008 11:28 pm (UTC)
ex_uniquewo on August 30th, 2008 03:34 am (UTC)
If I look at dates, the meeting took place before this post which means they may have taken into consideration what the Board says hence the different propositions. Or not. We don't know. In the end, it seems to me they went with what users wanted. Most people said #1 was fine, acceptable or the least worse in the comments.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
mackiedockiemackiedockie on August 31st, 2008 06:01 pm (UTC)
There is a John McCain ad blasting Obama on the LJ_2008 userpage. Does this reflect the LJ political position, or is this ad going on all accounts, basic and plus?
(Reply) (Thread) (Link)
martamarta on September 4th, 2008 01:20 am (UTC)
Not at all - we've taken some steps to make sure political ads aren't run, and they should be removed as of now.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread) (Link)
(no subject) - mackiedockie on September 4th, 2008 05:27 am (UTC)