*cough* Bullshit! *cough*

So this article on LiveJournal attributes its decline (for it is in decline) to a contentious userbase that hates upgrades.
Question: What upgrades?
I mean, Facebook changes its whole look and API every other week, and everyone bitches and still uses the site.  Twitter keeps adding features and annoying its user base, and it’s chugging along.  And in the past five years, LiveJournal has….
…well, fuck, what have they added?  A “like” button?  A “best of LJ,” FetLife-style?  Better sharing methods?  Anything?  Shit, as a daily LJ user, I can’t remember the last feature they added that actually, you know, changed anything for the better.  They added a couple of things that broke shit, but as far as anything I can see, LJ’s basically the same platform it was five fucking years ago.
And yes, I understand the concept of technical debt.  I’ve had to deal with that on SCG a few times – most notably, a project back in June 2011 that literally involved altering 60% of our database tables and a conversion script that took eight hours to process.  But LJ’s been static.  Yes, they’ve had the rampant stupidity of filtering content, which drove people away, but I maintain that’s survivable.
The real problem is that WordPress is adding cool new shit you can do daily, Twitter’s more convenient, Facebook has more users, and LiveJournal has…. exactly the same shit it had at its peak.  It’s like a fighter who hasn’t bothered to throw a punch in half a decade.  It’s dying because of a tragic lack of ambition to be anything more than it is now – or, more accurately, anything more than it was when it was purchased.

The Republicans, Black People, And My Rampant Impressions As A Left-Leaning Moderate

I watched the last night of the Democratic National Convention – not because I expected anything to change my opinions, but because part of me still can’t believe we have a black President, so I tune in to have the pleasure of reminding me that yeah, that happened.
But watching the Democratic convention, it struck me how naturally diverse the audience was.  On the brief occasions I tuned into the Republican National Convention (usually via YouTube snippets, I acknowledge), the audience was pretty much starkly white.  There were occasional cutaways to the handfuls of black people in the audience – because yes, black people can vote Republican, and enthusiastically – but largely, it was the Sea of Caucasia.
Whereas there were cutaways to the various ethnicities in the DNC, each probably carefully chosen by cameramen, but they didn’t seem as gratuitous to me.  Mainly because, on the big overviews of the crowds, there were just more of them to look at.
Yet when I’ve logged into Facebook over the past couple of days, I’ve seen repeated image macros from my conservative friends, touting all the black people in the conservative party – Condoleezza Rice! Herman Cain!  Colin Powell!  Clarence Thomas! We have black people, too!  We’re the party of color!
The problem is that it sounded like a marketing scheme. REPUBLICANS: NOW WITH 40% MORE BLACK!
Which is, I think, a problem with the Republican party.  Overhearing my conservative buddies talking about black people, they sound enraged, as if they deserved to have all of the black people and they weren’t getting their fair share.  It’s the kind of thing that sounds, to an outsider, like this whole lack of black voting is just a message thing – if we could just talk to those people correctly, we’d loop ’em all in!  The only reason the Democrats are getting them is because, well, they have some sort of crazy magic that allows them to ensnare other races!  Or, or, they pander to their base racial instincts!  If we just attuned our message, we could get more of the black people pie!
Which is, fundamentally, alienating.  It feels like hey, we need your demographic, so get over here.  Oh, you’re here?  We’re so glad to have you, we need you, stand forward.
Whereas Democrats certainly kiss their share of Latino butt (as any politician has to do for any significant voting bloc, conservative or liberal)… but for all of the Democrats’ fumbling with race, there’s a certain racial comfort that feels more baked in to me.  When among Democrats, you can, and should, discuss the problems that being of a given race is, instead of the oft-given conservative “That doesn’t matter, America is equal now, bringing up race makes you racist!” party line.  When I hear the Democrats talking race, it doesn’t sound defensive, but expansive. Hey, you’re here!  You’ve got problems because of your skin color?  Well, hey, is there anything we can do to fix that?
So it’s no wonder that the quote-unquote minorities turn out for Democrats.  Because when one party has the double-standard of “We’re all the same in God’s eyes, but you!  Stand up so people can see you,” and the other is “We’ve got our differences, but let’s pull together,” then the second is just naturally more attractive.  And it can be argued which party actually does better at breaking down the social problems that create racial barriers, but as a message?  The Republicans sound to me as though the black people are just a natural resource to be exploited, like oil or land.
And here’s the truth: that’s probably how all politicians view all voters.  Natural resources.  But the ones who win the vote make that drilling seem a little less transparent.
(Here’s another truth: this is probably how Democrats sound to the white working class.)

How Can You Tell If You Have Social Anxiety?

A Big-Name Author says, in a post, “If I blew you off, I didn’t do so intentionally. There are only two people I would have deliberately brushed off or ignored at this con, and happily, I didn’t run into either one.”
Another Big-Name Author says, in a comment, “There are only two people in SF I deliberately avoid.”
If you have social anxiety, you immediately go, “OH MY GOD, I’M ONE OF THOSE TWO PEOPLE.”  Even though you’ve had dinner with both of these people, and ran into both (albeit briefly) at that con, and didn’t feel blown off.  But still, stupidly, irrationally, you’re absolutely positive that something you’ve done or said in the interim has soured these two on you, and now you’re on their no-fly list, and who else did you offend this weekend?  What did you do?  And you start running through each conversation you had with everyone, scouring them for potential offense, positive that you’ve ruined your name forever and ever and ever.
Shut up brain.  Please.  For the sake of my sanity.  Shut up.

Being Honest Vs. Being Effective

So after discussing some of the harassment that apparently happened at WorldCon, a friend of mine on Facebook said this:
“These cons seem like horrible places.”
The problem is, they often aren’t.  Talking with a lot of my female friends, most of them didn’t have any incidents of note at the con that removed their ability to enjoy themselves (at least not that came up in conversation, and my female buddies aren’t shy about bitching about creepers).  I’d tentatively venture to say, knowing that I’m a guy and hence don’t get the kind of con-destroying harassment that females are prone to on a regular basis, that most people at the con actually just went and had a good time and weren’t made miserable by sexual bullying.
But some were.  Those people deserve safer spaces.  The only way to make these spaces safer is to publicize these incidents so we can rectify them… but we do so at the cost of making cons seem like a terrible place to be.  In that sense it’s kind of like New York City – which, yes, has some crime, but the focus on fixing crime makes it sound like when you step into NYC you’re automatically given a voucher for a mugging.
So we make cons actually safer by discussing bad behavior in public, but make them sound far less safe than, say, the fun cons of the 1970s when Isaac Asimov was pinching everyone’s ass and editors were trying to fuck young girls in elevators. So you make it better for people who attend while potentially driving new attendees away.  And I’m not sure how you fix that.
Likewise, during the Democratic National Convention, Saladin Ahmed was complaining on Twitter that from a practical perspective of international politics, Obama really isn’t all that different than Dubya.  Which is true, if you’re not in America.  I mean, once my family was blown to wet meat in a predator drone strike, I’m not sure I’d go, “Oh, thank the stars that explosion was authorized by a Democratic President!”
All true.  But still, there is a distinct difference between what Obama wants to do and what Romney wants to do in a lot of other areas.  Saladin’s absolutely right to complain, but on the other hand if Romney won, I don’t think he’d be that thrilled… and reminding people of Obama’s terribleness at a time when I think he really needs to win is counterproductive for victory, but productive for reminding us to hold our President’s feet to the fire when it comes to all of those human rights he claimed he was for back when he was running in 2008.
I don’t have a good answer here.  Sometimes, being outspokenly honest has unintended backlash, even if the results are good.  I like to point to a solution here, but in these cases, I want the cake and edibility as one: for people to publicize bad incidents at cons while making them seem attractive to attend, for Saladin to point out flaws in the Democratic party while still encouraging voters to get out there.  But I cannot.  And I’ll prioritize honesty, but acknowledge that sometimes it’s a bitch.

Updates And One Story That Summarizes All Of WorldCon For Me

So I’m writing a post on “Surviving Cons: A Guide For Socially Anxious Writers,” but it overflowed the time I’d allotted for blogging today.  (As it turns out, being an introvert, my social energy levels are closely tied to my writing levels.  When I’m out of people-juice, I’m out of writer-juice as well.)  So that’ll come… later.
Unfortunately, thanks to a flood of spam, I’ve had to disable anonymous commenting on the LJ.  Which irritates me.  I mean, not only does LJ now segregate anonymous posts with suspicious links… not only are these entries from a long time ago, and not really heavily-Googled anywhere… but LJ is a dying fucking social media.  Yet here I am, dealing with 500 emails over the weekend from some idiot spammer who can’t figure out that all of his messages are being screened. One suspects a rather dim spammer who bought some CAPTCHA-cracking tool from 2007, and is just now taking it for a spin in his attempt to become the king of MySpace spam.  Fucker.
So sorry, no anonymity.  You can have Facebook, or Twitter, if you need, but getting that many emails over the weekend just cinched it.
In the meanwhile, have one story that summarizes all of WorldCon for me:
So I was hanging out with a female writer of some note, who was a very cute drunk – you know, the kind who apologizes every ten minutes because she’s not normally like this, all giggly, swaying a little.  And we ran into my friend Tasha, who is a reviewer of some note.
“I ran into a guy who was name-dropping you quite heavily in conversation,” Tasha told me.
“Really?” I said, shocked.  “Someone’s trying to trade on his knowledge of me?  He clearly didn’t know who he was talking to, since he’d have done far better to name-drop you.”
“No, no,” Tasha declined.  “Not at this con.  I’m just a reviewer – you’re an actual content creator.”
“I disagree.  Your writings put art in context, and bring it to a larger crowd.  I think you’re far better for art than I am, actually….”
Drunken female writer looked on, amused, just as we walked into the Barfleet party – which, as Barfleets are wont to do, was hot, overcrowded, and full of music.  Within seconds, we’d lost Tasha.  And the drunken writer said, in as forlorn a voice as anyone could muster, “Where’s Tasha?”
I didn’t know, but drunken writer was insistent.  “I wanted to talk to Taaasha,” she repeated, sounding heartbroken.  “Where’s Tasha?”
After several plaintive queries, I realized where she was, in that state of inebriation where you can hold on to only one thought so it becomes Very Important – in fact, since you have only the one thought, it rolls around in your head, gaining steam until it takes on massive weight, the most important thing in the world.
So I went to fetch Tasha, and after wandering through a sweaty dance floor and texting and searching through crowds, I got a text confirming that Tasha had moved on and was not coming back.
“Where’s Tasha?” said drunken writer, lamenting.
I knelt down.  “Tasha’s gone off to dance,” I told her, with all the seriousness of a man telling his child that her puppy is in the hospital.  “She’s not coming back.”
Drunken writer slumped, looking crestfallen.  “…but I wanted to talk to her about the false dichotomy between art and criticism!”
That’s WorldCon, folks.  Drunken revelry and Very Serious Discussions, inexorably intertwined.