If so, you'll be glad to know we've just introduced a new feature for Paid and Permanent Accounts to help you in these situations. You can now select to view any journal or community in your own journal's style with just a click of your mouse. Even better, you can select this setting permanently for all journals and communities you view, so they will always display automatically in your own style.
Easy navigation strip toggle
LiveJournal has long since had the ability to add ?style=mine to any journal or community URL manually, thereby forcing the page to display in your own style. However, you had to type this text each time you visited a new page.
To make things easier, we've added new links on the navigation strip to toggle between your own style and the original style of the journal or community itself.
The navigation strip will toggle between a "View in my own style" or a "View in original style" link, depending on which view is currently being used. You can activate the navigation strip and customize its color scheme on the Customize Journal Style page.
If you already know you want to use this new found display power everywhere on LiveJournal, use the "View all journals and communities in your own style" setting on the Viewing Options page to set this preference globally.
Once activated, every journal and community you visit will automatically be displayed on your own style. For users with specialized visual display preferences, we hope this helps make your surfing experience a little easier for you, assuring that each page is displayed exactly as you need it.
Important Edit: It has been discovered that the toggle links in the navigation strip do not function quite as described in the original post above (left as is above for reference).
The feature was designed and coded so that the navstrip toggle is, in fact, toggling the global preference itself on and off. It is not a 'one at a time, for this journal only' switch. Each time you use it, it is toggling the global setting itself on or off.
We apologize for the confusion and that the initial review of the entry did not catch this discrepancy. We would also like to thank those users in the comments that have brought up this question/issue.