I am seeing one comment on the page above me. I see an entry in your original post that says that there are two comments. That makes me wonder if comments on DW are failing to transfer over to LJ. Your post itself shows up just fine.
Isn't the point of this exercise that we don't want comments being crossposted except when both the people making the comments and the person making the post want to?
If I had my druthers, there'd be a way to get the comments from both DW and LJ on one page, but I hadn't thought about the hard and soft privacy issues.
The hard privacy issues are relatively solvable-- opt-in for comment cross-posting, and either it doesn't happen for flocked post or it only happens if commenters are friends on both sites.
The soft privacy issues -- I don't know if there's a standard term, I'm using soft privacy to mean the kind of privacy which results from lack of easy access rather than formal barriers -- are harder.
Not going to happen. I won't want to post two independent sets of replies in two places (redundant work!), and I won't want to read one set of comments if I've decided not to respond to it (frustration!). I'm not sure if it's possible to post one comment and have it show up both places, but even if it we're, I'd have to check if the comment I was replying to was showing up in both places, which would be an incredible nuisance (that's the sort of thing I want handled automatically) . . . and if I missed it and commented on lj to someone who only wanted to appear on DW, that would defeat the whole point of their being on DW, which would be rude. I can't see any way to do this that's not a lose.
According to this page, Dreamwidth wants your LJ password. Soliciting passwords used on competing sites is vastly worse than even LJ's crossposting of comments on locked posts.
I get the impression from this discussion that there's some way to crosspost using OpenID, which doesn't require giving away any passwords (though it strikes me as very prone to user error and spoofing). Is that what you're using?
That's the problem; you can't know what they'll do with your password, in this case or in general. There's never a good reason to give a third-party password to a website. Look up "Quechup" for the kind of things they can do with them.
They store a hashed version of the password-- I'm not sure if that means they can't recover it, but at least it means they're less likely to lose it by accident.
If I don't think I can trust someone with a password, I'm not going to trust their assurances that that they won't keep it.
Honestly, I'm more likely to trust Dreamwidth with my password than Livejournal, but that's a personal preference based on my experiences with both communities and how the operators interact with the users.
A developer answers the question here: http://dw-news.dreamwidth.org/24656.html?thread=2859088#cmt2859088
"If you select the 'save password' option, then DW saves an encrypted version of the password. Now, because of the way LJ passwords work, that encrypted password is sufficient to get full access to your account. But it does mean that if, say, you use that same password for other things, then nobody would be able to get from the encrypted version to the plaintext password.
You can also choose not to save your password, in which case you'll be asked for your LJ password every time you crosspost. In that case, all the DW servers ever get is a one-time authentication token."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
zvi and
no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 03:28 am (UTC)http://labs.ideeinc.com/multicolr/#
is also nice for finding images.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 04:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 02:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 06:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 09:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 01:37 pm (UTC)The hard privacy issues are relatively solvable-- opt-in for comment cross-posting, and either it doesn't happen for flocked post or it only happens if commenters are friends on both sites.
The soft privacy issues -- I don't know if there's a standard term, I'm using soft privacy to mean the kind of privacy which results from lack of easy access rather than formal barriers -- are harder.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 01:32 pm (UTC)The drawback to the system is that if you want to see all the comments, you'll need to check two places.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-09 05:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 11:01 am (UTC)According to this page, Dreamwidth wants your LJ password. Soliciting passwords used on competing sites is vastly worse than even LJ's crossposting of comments on locked posts.
I get the impression from this discussion that there's some way to crosspost using OpenID, which doesn't require giving away any passwords (though it strikes me as very prone to user error and spoofing). Is that what you're using?
no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 01:29 pm (UTC)I'm not the best person to ask about the details of DW.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 02:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-08 04:04 pm (UTC)They realized this was an issue early on and worked around it: http://dw-news.dreamwidth.org/7298.html
It was resolved here: http://dw-news.dreamwidth.org/16019.html
no subject
Date: 2010-09-09 11:52 am (UTC)If I don't think I can trust someone with a password, I'm not going to trust their assurances that that they won't keep it.
no subject
Date: 2010-09-09 01:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-09-09 04:51 pm (UTC)"If you select the 'save password' option, then DW saves an encrypted version of the password. Now, because of the way LJ passwords work, that encrypted password is sufficient to get full access to your account. But it does mean that if, say, you use that same password for other things, then nobody would be able to get from the encrypted version to the plaintext password.
You can also choose not to save your password, in which case you'll be asked for your LJ password every time you crosspost. In that case, all the DW servers ever get is a one-time authentication token."