Entry tags:
Friends Lock - I can has?
Found this link on
jantalaimon's journal - thank you!
You know how the new profile advertises the Search option with a nice blue-colored spelled-out link right next to your entry count? Well, this search option was on the old profiles as well, but it was a little magnifying glass that nobody ever seems to have used, judging from the frowny-faced posts about the 'new' search option I see cropping up everywhere.
This search option might make it possible for people to view your friends-locked entries even if they are not on your f-list.
ETA: Or maybe not! LJ is being as confusing as always. Go here for some clarifications.
If you don't want that to happen, go here and follow the instructions.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
You know how the new profile advertises the Search option with a nice blue-colored spelled-out link right next to your entry count? Well, this search option was on the old profiles as well, but it was a little magnifying glass that nobody ever seems to have used, judging from the frowny-faced posts about the 'new' search option I see cropping up everywhere.
This search option might make it possible for people to view your friends-locked entries even if they are not on your f-list.
ETA: Or maybe not! LJ is being as confusing as always. Go here for some clarifications.
If you don't want that to happen, go here and follow the instructions.
no subject
Most of my posts are public, but the ones I lock I lock for a reason.
I'd already clicked to block one of the search options after Botgate, but I didn't know about LJ Search getting up to the same shenanigans.
no subject
Same here. I've seen it happen more than once that f-locked entries got made public. I don't know if this was down to untrustworthy friends or the LJ search, but I'd rather not take any risks.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Meaning that, if this post was not f-locked when ljseek added it to their database, and you f-locked it 15 seconds after the fact, it *would* still be findable. If it were posted as f-locked right off the bat, it would not be found.
Anyways, checking this is easy enough: do a search for any of your f-locked posts you *know* you have not unlocked, or post a locked test-post, wait about 24 hours (ljseek parses lj about every 12 hours, if I recall correctly), the search for it. If you find it, my bad, but I doubt you will - I cuss out ljseek and everyone who posts comm-locked posts often enough when I can't find them in my searches to have a little experience with this.
no subject
Either way, it's not a bad thing to tell people about those two check-boxes, because the way they're buried in the darkest corner of the account settings, I doubt most people come across them by accident.
no subject
Dude. You should hear me cuss when some person or another whose journal I want to search to find *that one thing I really want/need to find* has turned the ljseek searching off. Seriously, unless it's states or personal secrets and the poster is not wise enough to f-lock right off the bad, ljseek does no more harm than google (the satan) which I might also point out *also* caches the pages it parses. But we don't see any options to lock out search-engine searches, do we? *huffs*
no subject
I just sometimes wish LJ was a little, you know, simpler. Lol.
er, yeah, editing since I saw your newly edited post
Yeah, but. Your post is still just as or more panic-raising than the one you linked to - if you know now what you didn't know then, could you at least please edit it?
Because I really like ljseek, as useless as it can sometimes be (read: more often than I'd like), and if there's a mass blocking of it on lj due to folks spreading false facts, I'll be one even more unhappier panda.
Because it's always that *one* author with that *one* story that has the search banned that I need to find in a clinch, or something, and, seriously? Let's just campaign against real informations abusers the likes of google or idiots like the lj PTB, but not half-decent if not particularly smart sites that try to make lj a more useable place.
Nevermind, you already did it. Sorry for the rant. Am not a happy panda today. grrrr stoopid lj design-blind team grrrr
Re: er, yeah, editing since I saw your newly edited post
Ech, idk. The profile is still fugly. xD
no subject
There's a room in heaven where all good horizontal lines go to, and right now they're all crying in misery over the abuse going on down here. D:
no subject
Also, my PM feature link is gone. Looking at other profiles has me believing that it should be in the 'Contact' column, but there it is not. Sigh. I need the PM feature. People from the comms I mod use it to contact me. I checked; it's still turned on. I can has link plz?
no subject
Maybe you should check out someone else's profile for the "real" view - apparently, now users see their own profiles differently than others. Though why *I* would want to see the list of comms I have posting access to and no one else is allowed to is beyond me... @.@
no subject
Though why *I* would want to see the list of comms I have posting access to and no one else is allowed to is beyond me
Yeah, idk. And things like the stats, stuff that some people would really like to be hidden, are right out there in the open without even an option to at least collapse them. Wtf, LJ.
no subject
no subject
Still, it's not something I'm very comfortable with, and I don't like it that the profile advertises all my journal details right at the top next to my user name. And I'm still finding it fuck ugly, even after I had 24 hours to get used to it.