etoile ([info]woofiegrrl) wrote in [info]suggestions,
@ 2006-03-22 02:37:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:userpics, § rejected

Donate userpics to other users

Title
Donate userpics to other users

Short, concise description of the idea
Allow users with spare userpics to grant them to other users at their discretion.

Full description of the idea
Users who are not using all of their userpics can give them to friends. An audit trail could be optional - on the recipient's allpics.bml page, "gift from [donor]" could be displayed next to icons. Or that part can be left out. Returning the icons to the original giver should be either disallowed entirely or left to the discretion of the recipient.

An ordered list of benefits
  • Users can give something more meaningful than a virtual gift
  • Users who can afford to buy extra userpics can give however many they like to their friends without having to buy a separate gift subscription with a fixed amount
  • Users who cannot afford to subscribe could get more userpics from their wealthier friends

An ordered list of problems/issues involved
  • If returning icons is left to the recipient's discretion, could cause drama between friends
  • Requires additional coding for transferring items between users
  • People might type their friend's name wrong and send the userpics to the wrong person

An organized list, or a few short paragraphs detailing suggestions for implementation
  • A donation center (donation.bml or donatepics.bml) for users to transfer the icons
  • An e-mail should be sent to the recipient's registered e-mail address notifying them of the gift (as is done now with virtual gifts)


(Post a new comment)


[info]ccnuggie
2006-03-22 05:08 am UTC (link)
So you want the LJ crew to spend time developing something that will reduce their income.

Brilliant!

(Reply to this)


[info]leora
2006-03-22 05:13 am UTC (link)
Hmm, I have mixed opinions. I assume it would mean the cost for paid userpics would have to increase, and I don't think most users would like that. However, if most users think paying more for userpics to gain the ability to transfer them is desirable, then I don't care.

The cost should have to increase, since LJ is a bit like a buffet table. You pay one price to enter and get a bunch of benefits. Sometimes you pay extra for the dessert section and get more extras. But it's the incredibly rare user who fully uses the benefits they get - every voice post they can make, using all of their database space, using all of their userpic slots, etc. This means that the cost can be based on the average use, rather than the actual cost for the full use of services (preferably with some buffer built in). So, if you increase average use, you increase cost.

I don't have any inside knowledge of LJ or their pricing considerations. This is based purely on basic economic knowledge. But it seems like there'd be no way to allow this without raising the cost for at least add-on pics and probably a paid account. Plus, it'd be hard on LJ when they just gave people a big increase in userpics at the same price to then add on a significant increased cost beyond that for their generosity.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]leora
2006-03-22 05:16 am UTC (link)
Oops, to complete my analogy. So, it's like an all-you-can-eat buffet that lets you share your food with a friend for the same cost. Sure, there are limits, but they're set pretty high. It's fairly obvious why allowing free sharing at a buffet is disastrous to the restaurant.

I suspect, but again, do not know, that LJ tries to give paid users enough benefits and space that most of them will be fairly content. Not so most will want to use all of it, but so most won't want to use all of it. So, being paid gives you the perks you want. If this is the model, then you can see why allowing free sharing would be a really stupid business model.

But I could be wrong. This is just my opinion and guesses.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pauamma
2006-03-22 09:24 am UTC (link)
And I'm reminded of a GPF strip:

Dwayne: "5 all-you-can-eat"
Fooker: "Make that 7 to be fair."
(much later)
Fooker: "I'm going for 32nds. Anyone wants some?"
Someone (Ki?): "I'm in awe."
Someone else (Trudy?) "I'm in disgust."

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]dailybecoming
2006-03-22 05:22 am UTC (link)
this sounds complicated and does not help LJ in general - the higher number of User pics was given to paid members as a bonus for paying the bills for LJ - if free account users (like me) were givin more user pictures then the free user would not desire a paid account as much.

If one wanted to give a friend more user pictures it would be a nice gesture to give them a 3 month paid membership (or how ever long one wanted) its not expensive and it would help out LJ with paying the bills - user pictures spike up the hosting cost and users with mult. user pics should be helping to pay for that cost...

granted if you already have a paid user account - andonly use half of the pictures - i could see why you would want to use them how ever you wanted - since they were paid for by you - even still i stick to the above point: user pictures are a bonus for paid users.

(Reply to this)


[info]bookslibretti
2006-03-22 05:25 am UTC (link)
I think that's going to be a lot of work for coders, for the servers, and for support volunteers. Maybe in the perfect world it'd be nice, but it's going to be a ton of work and LJ won't benefit at all (you can even argue it'd hurt LJ, because the people who receive the icon spaces might otherwise buy them).

Even if this gets voted through, don't expect to see it. The "Don't automatically tick 'Make this my default icon' when uploading a new icon" suggestion still has yet to be implemented, and that'd require about five minutes of work for one coder once.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]freso
2006-03-23 01:19 am UTC (link)
I'd do it in two - but I thought the patch for it has already been checked in... ?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bookslibretti
2006-03-23 01:55 am UTC (link)
Yeah, I was being a little generous with that estimate -- it really would take no work at all. But I don't think it's been implemented yet; go here and look at the bottom of the page to check. For me, the "Make this your default userpic" is still checked by default.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]freso
2006-03-23 02:13 pm UTC (link)
It apparently is checked in. Whether it's actually live on the site yet? I don't know.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]gameboyguy13
2006-03-22 05:33 am UTC (link)
And what happens when the donor's paid account or userpic addon expires?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]dawna
2006-03-22 05:36 am UTC (link)
or the person runs out of space and needs the icons back :x Not saying I would do that to anyone but it could happen and OMG the drama.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]amanda
2006-03-22 07:35 pm UTC (link)
Yep, that's what crossed my mind....what if the donor run out of space and wanted the donation back.....

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]trbleclef
2006-03-22 05:57 am UTC (link)
The above comments indicate that this is essentially impossible

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]adudeabides
2006-03-23 01:56 am UTC (link)
ditto that

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sofiaviolet
2006-03-22 11:41 am UTC (link)
I foresee far too many problems with this to ever make it work.


*As the first comment points out, it is likely to reduce LJ's revenue.

*If a free user wants to give away one of his/her six, fine. But what if a paid user gives away one of his/her thrity, then later stops paying for his/her account? Does s/he have five or six userpics, and does the gifted userpic become inactive?

*More drama than it's worth, frankly.

*Things such as paid and permanent accounts are not transferable, so why should userpics be? Particular extra userpics.

*What happens when a paid user (with or without extra userpics) wants to grant a userpic to a free user? Currently, to receive extra userpics, whether by purchasing them or receiving them as a gift, the recipient must be a paid user. As I understand your proposal, LJ would be losing out on revenue not only from people electing not to buy extra pics, but from people electing not to buy or continue paid accounts.

(Reply to this)


[info]jennifer
2006-03-22 11:50 am UTC (link)
I think this might very well fall into the Terms Of Service bit with paid time, in that it isn't transferrable. http://www.livejournal.com/legal/tos.bml

And, well, I really can't green-thumb anything that's potentially against the ToS.

(Reply to this)


[info]woofiegrrl
2006-03-22 12:50 pm UTC (link)
Okay folks - excellent points. Definitely brought up some things I hadn't thought of (though the drama stuff did occur to me), and I appreciate the thought given to this. Bad idea, I gotcha. Thanks again though!

(Reply to this)


[info]asciident
2006-04-04 04:12 pm UTC (link)
This suggestion has been migrated for implementation consideration.

[What does this mean?]

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]asciident
2006-04-06 08:05 am UTC (link)
This suggestion has at this time been rejected by site employees. It will be reconsidered at a later date.

[What does this mean?]

(Reply to this)(Parent)


Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…