Feh

[lnr]

Perhaps me and rjk shouldn't read LJ in the same room as each other, guven some people trust one of us and not the other. I try hard not to read things over his shoulder, but just glancing across at his screen at the wrong moment and I can see his friends page is showing a post from a friend of ours which mine isn't, from the big friendly icon of their face at the top of the screen. I wouldn't dream of trying to read it, but I guess it hurts a bit that they don't trust me. Or to be more honest it hurts to have it rubbed in. If I didn't know it was there I wouldn't care.

The whole thing with the padlock on items with some level of security but not saying *what* level really bugs me too. If I hadn't realised that the same article wasn't showing on mine, perhaps if I'd just wandered into the room, it would have been perfectly simple for me to assume it was only "normal" friends-only and not a restricted set of friends and read it without thinking about it much.

Comments

[simonb.livejournal.com]

*hugs*

I know what you mean; I really wish that LJ would show more than just the padlock if the post was restricted by group rather than by just friends only (private posts (i.e. ones which only the poster can see) have a separate icon).

However from what I've seen such a feature may not be welcomed by some of the people behind LJ as things like friends groups et al goes against their view of what the LJ community should mean - i.e. all of your friends should be able to see all of your friends posts. To those people the "friend" bit in the "friends list" is taken to be its dictionary meaning. I see it more of a "monitor list", although with my use of the "Default View" group its a "Maybe monitored list" :)

I suppose its something I could code up and hand over to the LJ developers at some point; however it would require me to have things like free time and a willingness to deal with politicals in LJ development :(