Perhaps then the way to encourage/argue for this would be to make positive statements about what you're writing rather than the quite forceful (and unenforcable) negative ones about who is allowed read it in this disclaimer. I could fully support a disclaimer saying "This journal is intended to be . Please take it in that context and treat it with respect." Even then though, we should remember that we're still at risk of people not doing so. Meg at not so soft (http://www.notsosoft.com/blog/) had this sort of problem recently where one commenter persisted in reacting as if Meg was setting herself up as queen of the internet and arbiter of all moral standards when she was simply trying to start a discussion. In the end she found a way to prevent comments from this person (through some v. techy way involving IP addresses I think) but the risk is always there.
I think it's an issue which is easier for LJers to deal with because they can move to friends only whereas people using blogger et al can only be public or be silent. (I suppose they *could* use .htaccess to control readership but that would be very fiddly indeed and still not give the same kind of control).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
chiming
no subject
Date: November 26th, 2002 06:50 am (UTC)From:I think it's an issue which is easier for LJers to deal with because they can move to friends only whereas people using blogger et al can only be public or be silent. (I suppose they *could* use .htaccess to control readership but that would be very fiddly indeed and still not give the same kind of control).