?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Andrei in the office

lordandrei

Andrei's Universe

One man's journey from infinity to nothingness


Previous Entry Share Flag Next Entry
Andrei in the office
lordandrei

Suggested Paid members new product: 25 block interests

This is an original idea that has been cross posted to lj_biz.

One of the functions that most catches my attention on LJ and seems to be one of the largest resource drains is the interest list. This is capped at 150 per user regardless of level (free, paid, perm). Each logged in user polling userinfo.bml does an immediate list-to-list compare in order to generate the links. The links for an interest now give a list that represents .07% That is. Throttling 1.5 Million users to 1000: 500 Communities and 500 Users.

The discussion on an earlier post to this community discusses the resource needs of trying to compile this data on the fly and of course this simply comes down to use of function vs. revenue to supply the equipment to do the task.

While I don't have hard and fast data (though I'm willing to try to write some analytical software to supply said data), I would estimate that at least 1/2 of the 'active' users (interpret active as you will) are sitting up against this 150 interest ceiling. This suggests there is at least demand to increase that limit. Doing so costs processor time. So, this would seem the perfect place to allow users to push a revenue stream into LJ. It seems to have worked well with user icons which is another purchase to expand function. Whereas with interests, the cost is more storage space that computational.

I'd be interested to hear some commentary on the possibliity, likelihood, and even the limitations that this idea has. I do not know a great deal of the internals of LiveJournal and can only many educated guesses as to the specifics of the resource needs for this.

Thanks

EDIT: The moderators of lj_biz approved this post.


  • 1
(Deleted comment)
That functionality used to be in LJ but has been temporarily disabled due to the resource drain. Admittedly, the algorithm was incredibly bug laden in it's design as it played favourites to the earliest adopters and users with alphabetically prominent User IDs. (Your were more likely to match AndreiBlog than Xeno_Andrei.)

I agree with LJMatch. If it's not specifically tied to LJ it's not going to be a suitable LJ alternative.

BTW: Welcome to the journal. How did you come across this one anyways:?)

(Deleted comment)
Ahh, cool. Which mutual of friend formed the bridge? I see we have a few.

  • 1