?

Log in

No account? Create an account

msilverstar

my mind boggles

« previous entry | next entry »
Aug. 6th, 2007 | 05:50 pm
mood: cranky
music: Twelve Gates to the City

Brad Fitzpatrick (LJ's founder and original developer) is leaving LJ. Brad confirms this. Fans yearn for the good old days when he was in charge.

Then he posts that in 30 seconds, LJ management told Brad: it's all child porn and he believes them. (I have several screenshots of this).

I don't know whether to be relieved that they think they really are going after child porn (and are therefore sincere) or appalled that they can't tell the difference between child porn erotic art, (and are therefore stupid). Sincere but stupid is the kindest interpretation of all their actions.


How will you be suspended from LJ? by Anonymous LJ User
Username
Years on LJ
Snape
Hours left until your suspension34
Your crimePosting all that damn porn!
Who reported youedigo
Your fateOne word: MySpace.


ETA: LJ is sending out standardized email answers to people who sent them angry messages, saying there will be a post on the lj_biz community tonight.

(crossposted to LJ, GJ, IJ and JF)

Link | Leave a comment |

Comments {13}

muskrit

(no subject)

from: thejennabides
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 01:13 am (UTC)
Link

Ugh. I wish I could be more articulate about how I feel right now, but that kind of sums it up.

Thanks for the updates and links. *muskrit chin hug*

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 01:24 am (UTC)
Link

Actually, I'm not surprised that they're sincere but incapable of distinction. I believe in the old saying "never attribute to corruption what you can attribute to stupidity"...

*hugs and more hugs*

Reply | Parent | Thread

sister mary jillian holtzmann

(no subject)

from: marginalia
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 01:18 am (UTC)
Link

as we all know "evening" for 6a means somewhere between 11pm and 1am, i am going to go ahead and take that nap i had been pondering.

ugh.

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 01:25 am (UTC)
Link

Yeah, well they couldn't work over the weekend, so they've been feverishly figuring out how to spin all day, and we all know startups work late!

Reply | Parent | Thread

sister mary jillian holtzmann

(no subject)

from: marginalia
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 03:05 pm (UTC)
Link

and as it turns out, i totally overestimated them. sigh.

Reply | Parent | Thread

(no subject)

from: tvillingar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 06:31 am (UTC)
Link

So, he's taking the time-tested ostrich approach? Put your head in a hole in the ground and pretend there's no place like home.

On the other hand, he's leaving so I can understand how he just doesn't care anymore to get to the bottom of this mess.

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 05:11 pm (UTC)
Link

It would have been ever so much smarter of him to just NOT SAY ANYTHING. *rolls eyes*

Reply | Parent | Thread

almaviva

(no subject)

from: almaviva
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 10:51 am (UTC)
Link

Did I miss where they posted or should I be underwhelmed by the fact they didn't keep their word. Again. I'm thinking if they want to regain the trust of their consumers, perhaps a customer service 101 course wouldn't go amiss.

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 05:12 pm (UTC)
Link

Elegantly put, a witty skewering of incompetence! *admires you*

Reply | Parent | Thread

peachy_penumbra

(no subject)

from: peachy_penumbra
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 12:53 pm (UTC)
Link

Hmm. I went through that post and the comments and my thoughts are:

1) Bread doesn't know anything about this, doesn't seem to be involved with this side of LJ, and is more of an engineer, so I don't blame him for backing out.

2) I do wish that he wouldn't editorialize, however, by making that comment about what lawyers and volunteers say. He didn't talk about or quote any lawyers, and this isn't the issue. No one is SAYING it's illegal, because (I'm pretty sure) this specific thing has not yet come up in courts in the jurisdiction in which LJ operates (I think they're in the 9th circuit, maybe?) I also personally think that LJ, as a private organisation, should be allowed to suspend users for violations of its rules, even if they aren't laws. But Brad shouldn't get in the middle of it.

3) That said, the problem I see here, and why I'm increasingly thinking of not renewing my paid account, though I will keep an LJ (at least until I move all 120 or so of my fics, which I don't really have time to do right now), is the indiscriminate and unprofessional use of the Abuse Team in suspending journals. I don't care if something's illegal, but if it violates rules then the rules had better be pretty damned clear so that a paid user doesn't accidentally break them. It's one thing to purposefully break a rule, but if these people had been warned beforehand, I don't know that they would have continued to break the rule and risk losing their account (and their money). As a business, LJ has an obligation to be frank and upfront, and the exercise reasonable standards of good faith dealing with its customers.

4) If LJ is indeed deleting accounts based on "artistic merit" standards, well then we've opened a whole new kettle of worms. If you look at history, this smacks of the worst kind of censorship. Who is 6A to determine what is art? There need to be clear, objective standards here, that can be applied universally (ie; for anime-style art it needs to be pretty clear that the person is underage, or stated somewhere in writing that they are, not just assumed by looking at the art through a Western lens). It also really bothers me that in a lot, if not all cases, the people reporting these things are other users. I'm not convinced that LJ/6A are really checking up on the reported abuse to make sure that it's a clear violation. Hello, McCarthy, good to see you again. It's been a while.

5) Finally, the part that really upsets me is that they are doing this to paid users without offering partial refunds. If it's a clear violation of TOS, that's one thing, but if some guy randomly decides that what you're doing isn't art and is therefore obscene and therefore violates a rule, you should be entitled to a refund. I think this is why a lot of people with paid accounts aren't returning. Some people say "well, this doesn't affect my fandom; I'm not in HP and my fandom doesn't have age issues," but think about it this way. If LJ can decide that this particular thing is a problem, who's to say they won't go after "obscenity" in general next? The user who commented about the heterosexual porn communities made a good point, even if the logic was a bit flawed. What if LJ decided to target the gay porn community? Would we be subject to fair standards of review, and/or entitled to a refund if our journal content was judged to be in violation? I doubt it.

The bottom line here is that LJ broke our trust. End of story. And when someone breaks my trust, I'm not all that inclined to give them more money.

Reply | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 04:51 pm (UTC)
Link

We are in violent agreement. I'm afraid their lack of clarity in communication shows a lack of clarity in thinking as well.

Their desire to compete with MySpace and Facebook for advertising and sponsorship dollars: also unclear on concept. LJ has paid users, that's unique. They should build on that.

sigh.

Reply | Parent | Thread

peachy_penumbra

(no subject)

from: peachy_penumbra
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 04:59 pm (UTC)
Link

Anytime you start wanting to compete with MySpace, you know something's wrong. Blech.

But yeah, I think the PAID part is what's key. Customer service, people! Customer service.

*gives you a snuggle*

Reply | Parent | Thread

Lotripper

(no subject)

from: msilverstar
date: Aug. 7th, 2007 05:13 pm (UTC)
Link

It's not just that -- they have a business model that no one else can match. Why blow it????

Reply | Parent | Thread