Alledgedly, DreamWidth has better access controls than LiveJournal. At least, that's what people seem to think. The actual explanation is over at http://www.dreamwidth.org/support/faqbrowse.bml?faqid=124
Actually, it looks to me as though it's worse than LJ.
In LJ, create two custom friends groups: "default access", and "default read". Whenever you post anything, give access to the "default access" group, instead of just "Friends". And when you want to read, navigate to http://<username>.livejournal.com/friends/default+read (in fact, by default your friends page shows the "Default View" group). Of course, if you want extra groups, by all means.
This seems to have an advantage over the DreamWidth arrangement in that the people in these groups can't tell (unlike DreamWidth's notification of "access" or "subscribe"). So if there's somebody that you're happy to read, but not give access to, you just leave them out of your "default access" group, and they'll never know.
LJ's interface for this is a bit more fiddly, I'll grant. But the functionality is there.
Why do you think DreamWidth's so much better?
Actually, it looks to me as though it's worse than LJ.
In LJ, create two custom friends groups: "default access", and "default read". Whenever you post anything, give access to the "default access" group, instead of just "Friends". And when you want to read, navigate to http://<username>.livejournal.com/friends/default+read (in fact, by default your friends page shows the "Default View" group). Of course, if you want extra groups, by all means.
This seems to have an advantage over the DreamWidth arrangement in that the people in these groups can't tell (unlike DreamWidth's notification of "access" or "subscribe"). So if there's somebody that you're happy to read, but not give access to, you just leave them out of your "default access" group, and they'll never know.
LJ's interface for this is a bit more fiddly, I'll grant. But the functionality is there.
Why do you think DreamWidth's so much better?
Tags: