Chris Schmidt's Journal

23rd May, 2008 at 07:41 pm

Voting for LiveJournal Advisory Board

I voted for LiveJournal Advisory Board today.

I voted for

jameth as my first choice.

Several of my friends have asked me why I did this, stating that Jameth is an asshole, a troll, and other similar statements.

I absolutely agree.

LiveJournal is now controlled by a group of people who do not have some altruistic goal at heart. This isn't world saving, and it's not a particularly profitable venture if you don't do it right. As a result, any business group is going to have to work hard to make a profit on LiveJournal -- and the more *business* incentives that they have to do so, the better.

If I'm going up against an organization which I do not believe has my best interest at heart, I want the representative that I have to be able to affect change as much as possible. LiveJournal's owners have already proved that they may not listen to Advisory Board members. There is no strong incentive for them to change this behavior...

Unless they're faced with an army of trolls.

Trolls are annoying. They are troublesome. And if you get enough of them together, they can affect change that a single advisory board member can't.

jameth leads an army of trolls. Say what you will, that's a powerful force.

Yes, he's an ass. Yes, he's going to do anything to make sure that the people he feels he represents get their way. But many of the things that he represents *are* the same things that you want. He's seen what he feels is abuse of power -- regardless of what it is -- and will fight against that. Thus far, I can't see anything that would make me think that Jameth would be anything other than the best possible choice to represent LiveJournal: not because I feel he represents me, but because I feel that he can more accurately represent my interests than anyone else, even people I consider friends or colleagues, because he has the ability to make himself heard in a way that no one else running does.

And if it comes to that, I think I know how our new SUP overlords may react:

| Comment | Read 12 | Link

From:

nicocoer
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 12:12 am (UTC) (Link)

I wouldn't vote for him. however, your poster there? HILARIOUS.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

furiosity
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 12:29 am (UTC) (Link)

...this argument is compelling.

(Reply) (Thread)

heh.

From:

kuangning
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 12:43 am (UTC) (Link)

I voted for him as well, for much the same primary reason. Other reasons include:

* It amuses the hell out of me to see other people get so aghast that he's winning over their serious candidates as if the serious candidates actually want anything all that different from what he wants, with the exception of whatever their little enclave (breastfeeding-icon-havers, fandoms, etc) see as OMG-important.

* He hasn't encouraged his followers to vote twice and three times by pulling out sock-puppet journals (though now I think I'll suggest it myself to even the playing field.)

* He's a friend of a friend.

* He's the person most likely to have fun with the position while trying to steer them the right way. It is not a Goddamned Congressional seat. It is not life or death. And if any of the serious candidates win, chances are, what it will be? Is boring.

* I don't want to see tantrums three months in because LJ isn't listening, and I don't want to see flouncing off in a fit of pique because exactly what everyone knew would happen, happened. He knows the score going in, and he'll stick it out and we'll all get some laughs at the very least.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

beginning
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 12:57 am (UTC) (Link)

I haven't decided yet if I'm even going to vote, but if I do, I really am seriously considering him.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

biztheinsane
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 01:20 am (UTC) (Link)

I kept meaning to nominate myself. WHOOPS.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

nou
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 02:17 am (UTC) (Link)

What can the leader of an army of trolls do as member of the advisory board that he can't do as a non-member of the advisory board?

(Reply) (Thread)

From:

jpallan
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 02:24 am (UTC) (Link)

What can a member of the advisory board do that a non-member of the advisory board can't?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

nou
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 02:32 am (UTC) (Link)

Dunno — you got any idea?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

beginning
Date: May 29th, 2008 - 03:03 am (UTC) (Link)

Late off-topic comment:

I love that icon. Very nice.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

jpallan
Date: May 29th, 2008 - 04:29 am (UTC) (Link)

It reminds me of 19^th century cameo portraits, which I adore.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

crschmidt
Date: May 24th, 2008 - 01:40 pm (UTC) (Link)

My expectation is that members of the advisory board will know things first, and therefore will be able to act more quickly than the general public on matters of some import. Example: Brad knew about the Basic accounts disappearing before the decision was acted on, and was in a position to offer advice to the organization, but not in a position to do anything about it.

Presumably, Jameth is going to be in a position where much of the interesting things that happen "Behind Closed Doors" are not something he can speak about due to things like NDAs and so on. However, there are two counterweights to that:
* This is not, likely, the position of a lifetime for him. I think that he is principled enough to make a stand even if he thinks it might cause him his position on the advisory board if it is an important enough issue.
* You can do a lot without visibly breaking an NDA when you have a large enough group of people to back you up.

I think that the fact that Jameth is going to do whatever it takes to see his position upheld extends beyond just being on the board, to even getting himself kicked off if it is the best way to get things done. This seems unlikely to be true of many 'serious' candidates, where this *is* a status position. LiveJournal support is a community which has always been, to a certain extent, about craving higher status: the privileges system, the abuse team 'ranks' being sufficiently seperated, etc. All that is a reward system for hard work -- but it also serves as a 'status' badge, and this just falls into the same category. No matter how principled, I don't think that many of the people who got into this position would be willing to abandon it on a matter of principle.

I could be wrong; I know that *I* wouldn't be, if I got there, but maybe I'm assuming too much similarity between myself and some of the others running. I'd rationalize it as "Leaving would be abandoning the only place where I can help", but sometimes that really just doesn't make sense, and I don't think that I could take a principled stand if that were the case.

Anyway, to answer your question: "He'll know more, so he'll be able to do more", is the simple answer.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:

sherm
Date: May 25th, 2008 - 08:11 am (UTC) (Link)

Why do you feel that you deserve representation in someone's (doomed) business meetings? The ship sailed and sank 3 years ago.

This is a PR stunt - I assume SUP would be thrilled to have James out there trying to create relevance out of thin air.

(Reply) (Thread)