Slashdot Log In
Mass Deletion Leads To LiveJournal Revolt
Posted by
samzenpus
on Thu May 31, 2007 12:13 AM
from the we're-not-gonna-take-it dept.
from the we're-not-gonna-take-it dept.
Green Monkey writes "LiveJournal has been suspending accounts suspected of promoting incest — except that many of them were communities for survivors of abuse and people discussing Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita. Even after being informed of the problem, LiveJournal apparently refuses to reinstate the banned accounts. LiveJournal's official news blog has filled up with hundreds of complaints protesting the decision, so we could have another Digg-style user rebellion brewing." Update: 05/31 11:50 GMT by KD : strredwolf writes to let us know that in their offical blog LiveJournal admits to botching the suspension, saying "We made a mistake and now we are going to try to fix it."
Related Stories
[+]
LiveJournal Says Users are Responsible for Content of Links 283 comments
Many of you might remember the previous story about LiveJournal erroneously deleting hundreds of users as suspected paedophiles, spurred on by pressure from the group, Warriors for innocence. Since then, they've been taking action against users hosting material on their servers that they believe to be illegal. Today, LiveJournal management have demonstrated a serious lack of understanding in how the internet works, declaring that users are responsible for the content of the webpages that they link to in their blog entries. A user points out the obvious flaw: "I get ToS'd because the link's been redirected to a page full o' porn, even though context clearly shows that when I originally put up the link that it didn't actually land on a page of porn?"
One wonders how such a long-established blogging company can be so ignorant about the nature of the world wide web.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Mass Deletion Leads To LiveJournal Revolt
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 436 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Keep up the good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Funny)
(http://kestas.kuliukas.com/)
-----
0x14CE57
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Friday February 11 2005, @04:09AM)
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.buran.org/)
I've got news for you: it's still censorship, and just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's right or acceptable. For some people, that "fucking hobby" can make a huge difference in their lives. I know several sexual abuse survivors who deal with their issues by discussing them in blogs and forums, and their support structure was torn away when some "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" asshole decided that they were offended by such things and went running to mommy screaming about some imagined slight.
Think before you open your mouth and consider the fact that sneering at other peoples' chosen form of communication just makes you look like an elitist asshole.
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.quantumtemple.com/)
You also must not be too aware of how tightly knit a lot of the LJ community is. A friend of a friend being unjustly punished will still draw scorn and lots of it. As a matter of fact that's likely the exact reason you're hearing of it here.
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.livejournal.com/users/strawberryfrog/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 27 2005, @06:28AM)
No, you've got it wrong. I have a paid LJ account, that makes me a customer, but not an advertiser.
Re:Keep up the good work (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Let me be the first to say "incest" (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.metlin.org/ | Last Journal: Friday July 20, @01:58PM)
Egyptian pharaohs used to marry their own sisters. Several communities in Asia and Africa marry their own first siblings, cousins, or uncles marry their nieces.
While western culture may forbid it, the world doesn't necessarily revolve around western civilizations.
Morality is seldom absolute and in this case, it's quite relative (sorry, bad pun).
Re:Let me be the first to say "incest" (Score:4, Informative)
(http://davecheatham.com/)
Egyptian pharaohs used to marry their own sisters.
To be fair, they didn't actually have sex with their siblings, they just married them because of obscure power-sharing rules and stuff. Both the men and the women in such arrangements had other people to share their (separate) beds.
Incest is awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Incest is awesome! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Incest is awesome! (Score:4, Informative)
(Last Journal: Tuesday August 22 2006, @10:59PM)
This is perhaps the most disturbing semi-serious reply I've ever had to make.
Incest? (Score:5, Insightful)
Think of the children! To hell with the rest.
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.mindchild.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 29 2005, @10:16AM)
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://anticirc.coconia.net/)
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
I think humans aren't wired right for the Internet. If only a few decades ago you knew a few hundred people doing something, it was probably something common and (so mostly) accepted in society. Your odd desires were maybe shared by one or two, tops. Now you got the Internet, and the rules have changed completely but we haven't. On the Internet, you can find confirmation for roughly anything. There's always a social circle somewhere that agree with your practises, if you look hard enough.
For the most part, this is a good thing, the freedom to associate with people that think like you and want to live life like you. But you should be aware what happens when you let your highly distilled social circles decide your social norms as opposed to checking out what your average neighbor and townsfolk are thinking about it.
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Insightful)
--
Support EMI and iTunes Plus, show the big labels
that DRM-free music works. Boycott the rest.
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://obsessivemathsfreak.org/ | Last Journal: Friday June 09 2006, @08:15PM)
"Normal" is a well defined statistical term. Specifically in most circumstances, "normal" refers to the statistical mean of some value among individuals in a population.
What most people don't understand is that the normal, in and of itself, is not really very representative of the population. In fact, in almost all cases, there are no individuals in the entire population who's value agrees with the normal or mean. Best example, families have on average 1.69 children, but there is no one family with 1 and 69 hundredths children. Normal height could be, say, 6ft, but if you went around measuring people's height with a laser, you would likely never find someone who was precisely 6ft. They'd be ~5.999ft or ~6.0001ft.
The probability of finding an individual conforming to the mean, or indeed any value, is statistically zero. (Specifically, the normal is a point on a probability distribution of Lebesgue measure zero, but I digress.)
A better statistical measure of a population is it's variance, in conjunction with its normal or mean. With both of these values, you can give accurate estimations of the probability that someone's height will be between 5.5ft and 6ft, or whether they will have 1 or two children. Variance is almost never quoted, but it is as vital a statistic as the mean itself. Without it, the mean is a relatively useless statistic.
The mean of a randomly selected number between 4 and 8 is 6, the same as the mean of height in most populations. Height is not random, and has a different variance, but most modern junk news reports essentially do not distinguish between a random variable and a normally distributed one.
Effectively, when most people hear a statistic about the normal, average or mean, they probably implicitly assume that the variance is close to zero, in other words that the vast majority of the population hugs very close to the mean. In the age of mass production, it's easy to see why people who see row upon row of identical goods would think that human beings are essentially all equivalent with only exceptionally minor difference and the occasional "dud" here and there.
But humanity is much more diverse than most people are willing to admit. Yes we mostly have two hands and two eyes, etc, but the variation in our habits, temperaments, preferences, heights, weights, talents and skills. I'm not a eugenicist who only sees a one dimensional bell curve of humanity. I see a distribution with thousands if not millions of axes, and I think that the variation and diversity in humanity is a benefit to everyone, and that everyone can potentially put their individual talents to good use. Most people don't agree with this. They think we should try to shift the mean to "improve" the whole population. Instead what we should really be trying to do is increase the variance, on all the axes.
The internet is helping to increase the variance in our populations. People are better able to find things they enjoy and are good at rather than be corralled into the bottom end of a bureaucrat's bell curve. The internet enables people. Some people don't like this. They want "normality". They want a smaller variance. They want to feel secure. They'll use examples like incest, pedophiles, terrorists, etc, etc to frighten others away from the potential of the internet. They say they want to make "the children" etc, safer, but what they really want is the entire population to have a smaller variance, to be like those rows and rows of perfectly identical widgets. They don't do this because they are evil, they do it because they are afraid.
All across the world the internet is being censored, reduced and reigned in by both governments and by companies like Livejournal. They are getting away with it because people have put their trust these entities, and by and large, support their actions. Most people don't want that higher variance. Most people you speak to will support Livejournal here. It's a depre
Re:Incest? (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.ideaspike.com/ | Last Journal: Monday October 22, @04:43AM)
Most people would not object to two people with a genetic disability falling in love, etc. The objection - the one you might make if you believe you have the right to tell two informed, consenting adults what to do, that is - is centered around breeding. Breeding can be controlled. The problem for society is those people on the left side of the gaussian who fail to exert such control... still, if we're not going to tell people with congenital defects they can't have relationships, it pretty much torpedos the rational arguments against incest and turns them into classed prejudice instead of reason.
Oh well (Score:3, Insightful)
These sites are allowed to censor whatever they wish whenever they wish because it's their site. If you're upset with the service find somewhere better or stop complaining. It's not like the users are paying for the privilege. If the journals are lost for good then it really is the users fault for not backing up their own stuff.
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.nojailforpot.com/)
Exactly. A cheap hosting account and WordPress. Problem solved. NEXT.
Re:Exactly (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Interesting)
On the Internet, you can have as many copies of your house as you like. This will make it a lot harder for any mayor to burn it down. And your connectivity to your friends is not limited by location, but by protocol. If you stop using a proprietary site-specific protocol to communicate with your friends, and use an open one instead, it doesn't matter where your friends are located.
Infrastructure as you call it, which is single-site only, is not really Internet Infrastructure. It's proprietary infrastructure.
Of course it isn't in the interest of blog-hosting sites to facilitate blog-site interoperability, so such an invention has to come from other parties.
I used Usenet a lot in the past, and I'm sad to admit that I don't go there much these days, although I know the groups I participated in still thrive and have strong communities. However, I have found a few webbased boards for some topics that interest me. Boards that are very useful. Also some wikis.
However, an unpleasant experience in the past caused me to think about this issue. Let me explain the experience first. I visited often a place for Danish skeptics, skeptica.dk. At one point a third interested party offered the site to host a forum for the site. However, after a while, the third party, being part of a movement that suddenly found themselves under the conspicous eyes of skepticism, and received a lot of flak on the forum, their motivation being questioned etc. Naturally, one day the forum owner shut down the forum. Poof - gone. All the other relevant debate was suddenly inaccessible.
This could never have happened with Usenet. Why? Because of the distributed nature of Usenet. This is the LOCKSS project principle at work again. Lots Of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe.
We need two things:
1) A way to distribute blog hosting, so that a blog can't be shut down by a strike against a single hosting service. I don't have a solution at hand for that.
2) A way to distribute blog and web forum comments, so that the comments are distributed in a shared framework for all types of forums. I believe the existing and proven Usenet technology is easily adapted for this purpose, although RSS might also play a role. For example, a new hierarchy, similar to the IANA OID hierarchy, or the Java package hierarchy, using DNS names at the top level, could be used. This way, suppose I have myblog, and you have yourblog. So you post an entry about Java and OOP on your blog: it ends up in a newsgroup, blog.your.org.java, and perhaps you even tag it with the OOP category, so it also is crossposted to blog.your.org.oop.
I post a response on my blog: blog.my.org.programming (because I lump it all into one category), and also crosspost to your blog newsgroups. In addition, I call it to attention to the existing Usenet community by crossposting to usenet.comp.lang.java.misc.
Of course, there has to be some additions to make this work. Perhaps a way to subscribe to your blog newsfeed. Authentication and authorization. Anonymity/Pseudonymity. Etc.
I believe this could bring the known synergy effect from Usenet back into play by making a new unified, but distributed, framework for Internet-based discussion. A kind of Babel-tower project, I suppose. Discussion would again be uniformly searchable (presuming Google would carry all the groups), and foremost: a discussion would not be orphaned when the forum goes down. I visited a great Joomla forum daily until recently, but it went down for maintenance and hasn't been up for a few weeks due to problems. Terrible. What if slashdot.org went down?
Again, as for-profit hosting services will not win much - if anything - from this an approach, they will have to be forced to use it by user demand.
Any takers? This idea is free f
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://localhost/)
I think raising a big fuss about it is actually a better response, accompanied by or followed by a move to another provider. The bigger a noise is made about, the bigger the message that is given to the industry as a whole.
Re:Oh well (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.mindchild.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 29 2005, @10:16AM)
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Insightful)
If you believe that what you say is that important that it simply has to be on the internet, then you will make it happen.
The owners of livejournal have the right to do whatever they like with their website, provided that it is within the law.
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://kestas.kuliukas.com/)
On the spectrum of free speech from the least protected to the most sacred you have:
Sure, this is just livejournal. But then Fox will ban it, then the BBC, then they'll ban talk about it in pubs and on street corners, no more right to peaceful assembly or incest rallies, then it'll just be a goddamn Orwellian society where incest is a thought crime.
When people in power try to enforce their warped view of morality on good, freaky citizens it's time to found a new government.
Law != ethics (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.geof.net/)
So basically you're saying that the law is the law? That's rather unhelpful... Do you really mean to suggest that if something is legal, it is not wrong? Or that even if it is wrong, attempting to change it is a waste of time? (Never mind that the statement collapses the rather important distinction between rights and freedoms.)
I just want to clarify, becuase I often see this legalistic claim on Slashdot. I think it's incredibly harmful, but I'm not certain how many of those who make the argument fully understand what they're saying (I hope not many).
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Insightful)
I call bullshit.
Just as all those companies have the right to do whatever damn thing they please, we have the right to call them on the carpet for it, in public and out loud. Sure, go ahead and vote with your dollars, or your feet, but that doesn't mean people should not speak up for what they believe is right too. In fact, its axiomatic that your vote won't count, your boycott of a handful of dollars won't make an iota of difference, because there are another hundred thousand ignorant people standing in line to take your place.
But one voice speaking the truth can be magnified by the internet so that it makes an impression on millions. None of these companies would exist without us, the little guys, creating the content that they repackage and load up with advertising. Speaking out is the only chance we've got to actively make them sit up and behave like good internet denizens.
Not every protest will make a difference, but acquiescing into silence because it's "their website" is guaranteed to make no difference at all.
Re:Oh well (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://www.sff.net/people/Daniel.Dvorkin | Last Journal: Friday October 12, @01:42PM)
If every single person who was dissatisfied by every single thing every single company did just went off and did their own thing, let's face it, the economy would fall apart. Just as the "four boxes" should carefully be used in the proper order when trying to change the government -- jump ahead from soap to ammo, and you'll quickly find yourself alone and in a heap of trouble -- so there is a reasonable continuum of customer response to corporate action, from "enthusiastic recommendation" on one extreme to "boycott" on the other. And there's a whole lot in between.
Digg-style rebellion? (Score:5, Funny)
(Last Journal: Sunday October 22 2006, @10:27PM)
Let's show solidarity with them:
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Re:Digg-style rebellion? (Score:5, Funny)
(http://forkforge.org/)
Dude, that's a disgusting way to show solidarity. 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0 totally sleeps with 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c1.
"Warriors for Innocence"? (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently it started with a group of professional trolls who call themselves "Warriors for Innocence" and whose website, I am told, is baited with enough spyware and malware to lay waste to a continent. They complained and LiveJournal caved without so much as a whisper of investigation.
Who are this bunch, exactly? Anything like those "family-friendly" folks who complain en masse to the FCC whenever the word "sex" is so much as whispered on the television or radio?
Re:"Warriors for Innocence"? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:"Warriors for Innocence"? (Score:5, Funny)
OMG - incest!</satire>
I don't see why LiveJournal is doing this. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I don't see why LiveJournal is doing this. (Score:4, Funny)
"Think of the children... not THAT way!?!"
User-created sites (Score:4, Insightful)
dupe! (Score:1)
(http://robotmonkeys.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday October 26 2004, @03:23AM)
Shopping mall analogy (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://john.daltons.info/)
MySpace, LiveJournal, ... They are the Internet equivalent of the mega shopping mall. They represent convenience but convenience comes at the price of freedom. Have you ever tried protesting outside a shop in a mall? You can't. The mall is private land and you will get removed by security. Similarly with LiveJournal and the other "communities" based on a centralised website, they are private space and the owner can boot you out on a whim.
Why not stick with the public spaces on the Internet? If you need a chat room: use an email list, Usenet or run an IRC server. If you want to share your photos: put them on your web server. If you want a pretty home page with lots of "friends" put a home page on your web server with a guest book. These are the online equivalent of the local shopping strip. It's a public place and no-one can force you to bend to their whim. The public spaces of the net are better than web2.0. They are just as customisable, do the job as well or better and you don't have to take it on trust that your freedom will be respected.
I'm not sure I follow (Score:5, Funny)
This Thread... (Score:3, Funny)
As much as I would like to NOT think about this (Score:2)
Fourteen-year-olds hook up together all the time. It's called high school.
>>
Yes, and when fourty year olds are emotionally invested in watching, reading, or writing about it? That creeps me the heck out. Oh sure, I get it, when you're talking about Harry and Snape taking a disciplinary infraction to a whole new level, thats fantasy. Yes, understood. Its just pretty freaking creepy. Am I that worried that Livejournal doesn't want to be associated with you? No. Many sane people, you know, the kinds who don't have to make up a semi-Japanese word to describe their sexual perversions, do not want to be associated with you. I wouldn't be touching your business with a ten-foot pole... and why does that sound suddenly pornographic in this context.
Re:As much as I would like to NOT think about this (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the 40-somethings who want to read/write about this stuff, well thats fine. Writing about sex with a 14 year old is a long way from actually doing it, and the large number of people who have written and read such fiction indicates that it is far from abnormal for the healthy imagination to wander in this respect. I would say that writing or reading about paedophilia/incest/bestiality etc no more makes you a pervert or a threat to society than playing Quake makes you a murderer.
Re:As much as I would like to NOT think about this (Score:4, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Wednesday July 11, @08:27PM)
I would say it is largely made up of reliveing "the glory days" when said 40 year old was actually fairly attractive. Most people are never more physically attractive than they were when they were 16-17. Now they are fat and old and want to imagine that they and/or their lover are still young and buff. And if finding girls in their late teens sexy is so rare as to be a perversion, why is the working age of female models 16-25? http://forums.models.com/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=2
Its sad but... (Score:1)
Now there is a missing option from the most hated cliches poll [slashdot.org]: "think of the children"
Deleting content based on keywords? (Score:3, Insightful)
So, who's the next LiveJournal? (Score:2)
(http://www265.pair.com/perlman/blog/index.html)
Reminds me of an old saying... (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Tuesday May 10 2005, @07:05AM)
Seriously, I've been an LJ user since 2003. Never before have I been this pissed at them. Thank goodness I'm getting my own webspace soon. Yeah, I know, with the spare parts I've got lying around the place, I could set up my own Apache server, but I'm too lazy, and my current Internet provider forbids webservers.
WTF? (Score:5, Informative)
(http://paperlined.org/)
Incest has been around since the dawn of time (Score:3, Interesting)
Everyone has a legitimate concern about parents molesting their children. And it would be great if there was an easy solution. But this appears to be blindly striking out at the problem. This is several steps worse than banning novels which have a fictional murder because some people may be inspired by it. This would be similar to sending people to prison for saying that they're "killing time" because someone has a last name of "Tyme". Blind stupid methods for solving problems never work, they just impair the ability of regular people to live their lives. You know that the pedophiles are just going to adopt codewords and continue their pedophile ways.
I would be much happier if this was a regular pedophile hunt. Of course, malware is going to be downloading horrific stuff to unknowing people, leading to innocent people being dragged off to jail by techno-impaired judges and juries.
discussing incest is illegal? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:discussing incest is illegal? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:discussing incest is illegal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Proving once again, (Score:2)
(http://www.lqx.net/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 08 2003, @10:41PM)
Honestly, I understand why alot of people subscribe to these free blog services but you truly are at their mercy. At any given moment, a) your account could be deleted, b) the hosting service could disappear or c) your account could be hacked through no fault of your own. Hosting your blog on your own servers don't guarantee that those won't happen but at least it puts it in your hands. Until then, you'll always be at somebody else's mercy and you should deal with that.
Spuller (Score:2)
(http://cobbaut.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday January 26 2005, @07:44AM)
Anyone know where he moved to ?
Warren Ellis said it best (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday April 26 2006, @05:27PM)
I'm not saying Six Apart hasn't acted with bad judgment, but some of the outcry smacks of a seriously out-of-control sense of entitlement.
What do your call your act? (Score:1, Funny)
Go here to export your Livejournal content (Score:2, Informative)
If their deletion policy is this random, then it'd be a good idea to get out now.
Me, I'm going somewhere else - if this is the way lj acts, they've seriously lost my trust, and therefore my financial support.
Livejournal is a fool. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been watching this since it started, and what continually amazes me is how poorly livejournal is handling this. Over 24 hours into this, there is no announcement. Nothing reassuring users that their journal won't be next. Nothing apologizing for wiping out the incest survivor's livejournal in their witchhunt. Not even something saying "This is business, deal." The only news livejournallers have heard from livejournal came from an outside news source. [com.com]
Forget the deletions. People were upset, but would have forgotten it quickly if livejournal had just said "We purged some pedophile rings, but some other stuff may have gotten caught in it. If there are any livejournals purged that were genuinely innocent, tell us." People would've bitched, would have said the sky was falling down, that Livejournal had gone down the tubes since Six Apart bought them, but there wouldn't have been this sort of mass hysteria.
Now, I'm anticipating the next great fandom migration will be happening a few years sooner than otherwise, and this makes me grumpy, because migrations are a pain in the ass. And it wouldn't be happening any time soon if Livejournal weren't currently doing their level best to make fandom - a group of people who in my experience pay a great deal of money for their playspace - feel unwelcome.
Revolt unlikely (Score:2)
local information center (Score:1)
http://catrinella.livejournal.com/151812.html [livejournal.com]
Sue is crazy! (Score:2)
(http://not.a.valid.url.com/ | Last Journal: Monday October 02 2006, @07:51PM)
The Livejournal users are revolting! (Score:3, Funny)
(http://www.livejournal.com/users/kamdrimar/)
Better Headline (Score:2)
or, to be really attention grabbing:
"Incest Bloggers in Revolting Ferment"
--
BMO
Suggest Alternatives Here (Score:2)
Six Apart's CEO Speaks Out... (Score:5, Informative)
Well we really screwed this one up...
For reasons we are still trying to figure out what was supposed to be a well planned attempt to clean up a few journals that were violating LiveJournal's policies that protect minors turned into a total mess. I can only say I'm sorry, explain what we did wrong and what we are doing to correct these problems and explain what we were trying to do but messed up so completely.
What we did wrong;
1) Over the last couple of days we have suspended (not deleted) about 500 journals out of many millions on LJ.
2) It is now clear that in an unfortunate number of cases these journals were suspended for easily correctable problems in their profiles that would then allow them to be reinstated and that this was not communicated to the journal or community owners at all.
3) Further, because of miscommunication these journals were taken down before review could be completed to avoid mistakes.
How we are fixing it.
1) Over the next few hours we will review the journals that were taken down and wherever appropriate we will restore these journals or communities before 12 noon PDT. Sorry it will take that long but we do not want to reinstate true and clear violators of community policy.
2) In some cases Journals that were restored will be asked to clarify their profiles to avoid the appearance that they are soliciting or encouraging illegal activities.
3) Journals that we do not restore will be journals that we are fairly sure are actually intended to encourage activities that put minors at risk but we will review them if requested by their owner to be certain that we did not make a mistake.
4) In cases that we ask owners to clarify their profiles and they fail to do so within 7 days we will suspend their journals again.
So what were we trying to do when we messed up so badly?
As most of you know, LJ has a zero tolerance policy toward content that supports child abuse, pedophilia, or sexual violence. In implementation of this zero tolerance policy there were two issues that made it hard to apply these policies consistently;
Issue one was profiles.
There were a number of profiles that expressed "interest" in activities that most of us would agree put children at risk, notably pedophilia and child rape. Both in the instructions for profiles and in other places on the site we make it clear that interests listed should be evaluated within the context of "I like x", "I'm in favor of x" or "I support x". As many profiles are the only public part of a private journal and profiles serve partly as an advertisement for people of like interests, it is important that the content of a profile can be evaluated as if it stands alone. If your profile were to express interest in pedophilia with no other content that describes this interest as in helping survivors or protecting children from it we must read the profile as "I like or I support or I'm in favor of it." For this reason we suspended profiles that meet this criteria.
Another issue we needed to deal with was journals that used a thin veneer of fictional or academic interest in events and storylines that include child rape, pedophilia, and similar themes in order to actually promote these activities. While there are stories, essays, and discussions that include discussion of these issues in an effort to understand and prevent them, others use a pretext to promote these activities. It's often very hard to tell the difference. As such, we have suspended reported journals that do not clearly and substantially object to these activities while at the same time portraying them.
We recently received a complaint from outside the community about a number of journals. When we receive such complaints it is our obligation to look into them but it is our sta
Translation (Score:5, Funny)
And what happens? Some guys at
Lessee... religious nutjobs vs. geeks... The latter have more LJs here and they also got the better hackers, we better back-pedal.
New Trend for User Created Content Sites? (Score:2, Insightful)
(http://punkideas.blogspot.com/)
Apology Out (Score:1, Redundant)
Give me back my blog MotherFuckers (Score:2)
uhoh (Score:1)
Freedom of speech or? (Score:1)
Re:Freedom of speech or? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good idea. All the humans in the world will police the internet, and try to remove any objectionable content. In fact, I think we should have this internet-neighborhood-watch group centered in one country for easy administration. I pick Iran. The Mullahs can help determine what should be off-limits. Any objections?
ps - your ideas frighten me
Re:Freedom of speech or? (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://obsessivemathsfreak.org/ | Last Journal: Friday June 09 2006, @08:15PM)
Hang on, for emphasis, let me quote you again.
Well, in a general sense, I suppose many would be better off if they thought a bit before they spoke, or didn't just blurt out any old thing, but that's not really your point is it? Your point is that we shouldn't really have freedom of speech, should we? Our declarations should be subject to approval by appropriate persons, yes?
So you're saying that only "wise and learned" people should have the ability to preach to the masses? That our fragile minds are too weak to resist "corruption" by unscrupulous fools with internet access? That we should all become police informants against people who don't tow the line?
Of course, I imagine you'll deny my observation's of your post. Say that I'm putting words in your mouth, etc, etc. You won't even have the integrity to come right out and say what you really believe in. I would not agree with you, but I could at least respect that you have an opinion and aren't afraid to say it.
People like you are the greatest threat to our society. You are the cancer within that gnaws at the foundations that previous generations worked so hard to build. The sad fact is you don't like our free society very much, or at least, while you may enjoy your own freedoms and luxuries, you feel uncomfortable about extending those freedoms to everyone, regardless of class, race, creed or colour.
I think the people in the world we loosely classify as "right wing" could be better described as those who believe in and desire a caste system for our society, where the "right" kind of people enjoy freedom, democracy, prosperity, etc, and where the "wrong" kind of people are "protected" or "supervised" or whatever other euphemisms for serfdom and slavery are in vogue at the moment. There's probably some kind of evolutionary psychology explanation for this. It would be interesting to explore why such a mentality exists.
You need to accept that you are such a person. You need to have the integrity to voice your opinions openly instead of hiding them behind insidious and equivocal language. That at least an honest person could respect. Sure your opinions might be unpopular, but at least they'll be your honest opinions, and not a false facade. You'll be better off in the long run, and so will society.
Two Conflicting Responses (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand, as a person disgusted by sites screwing their users at the first sign of outside pressure, be it from "decency" advocates or overzealous DMCA users, I would like to see them badly hurt by this blunder so that others learn the lesson, respect their own TOS, and treat their users fairly.
what's wrong with people? (Score:1, Redundant)
(http://circletimessquare.com/)
1. livejournal overreacting
2. livejournal taking issue with incest
i see plenty of people in the replies here angry at #1 (right), and i see plenty angry at #2 (not right)
incest is wrong folks. for biological, developmental, psychological, moral, social... a whole range of reasons. please don't confuse people being angry with livejournal's ham handed approach to the issue as a signal that there is any reason to accept incest. it nonsense to conflate these two points, but a lot of you are doing just that
How to DDOS websites (Score:2)
(http://infaux.net/ | Last Journal: Thursday September 01 2005, @02:08PM)
1. Four magic letters: DMCA. Just email the webmaster saying they are in violation of it. It doesn't matter if the website consists of the Apache default page. They will quickly go into Pavlovian response and shut it down.
2. Just say some of the users are pedos & stuff. With the incredibly trendy demonizing of suspected(or real) pedos, accounts can be deleted instantly, as the article as shown. No need for pesky investigations or anything like that. It's best to shut it down.
LJ should purge Christian blogs too (Score:1)
Let's band together and drive these sick fucks off the Internet before they poison anymore young minds.
Won't somebody please think of the fucking children?
I know someone is going to reply with some complicated explanation of how there wasn't really any incest between Adam & Eve's children, but deep down you'll know as well as I do that you're just making shit up as you go along.
There's incest in Lolita? (Score:2)
Strange (Score:2)
Boo-Hoo... (Score:1)
(Last Journal: Thursday June 14, @11:03PM)
Not even worth mentionning (Score:2)
So what's the big deal? We're on Slashdot!!!
Sigh (Score:1)
(http://www.boole.org/)
Re:Incest is relative (Score:1)
Re:i wonder what would happen if there was real FO (Score:1)
(http://remote.net/)
I think that you invision something like Group Hug [grouphug.us] but even more open to free speach. 95% of what is on that site is meaningless drivel, but the 5% that digs deep is... well I will trust it to you to know what I am talking about.
One interesting way of presenting it could be something like a persistant slashdot-esq system, except by default new posts go to the top of the page, root 'comments' would be treated more like a forum topic and have all the 'topics' merged together in one grandious discourse with a threaded discussion under it. A sprinkle of Ajax and it could be pretty sweet, not to mention could be the heart of a new forum paridigm.
As for hosting, you may want to (quite seriously) ask existing sites like piratebay or allofmp3 that are 'on the edge' for suggestions.
Anyways, I really do wish you all the best on your idea.
Re:Download posts (Score:1)
LJArchive (for Windows, at least).
Re:i wonder what would happen if there was real FO (Score:2)
(http://wakaba.c3.cx/)
Re:Mass Deletion? (Score:1)
Re:i wonder what would happen if there was real FO (Score:2)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
Your site would be overrun by spam. It might take a while for the spammers to catch on, but once they did, they would take aim with their botnets and flood you with advertisements for and links to pharmaceuticals of dubious quality, pornography of every sort of persuasion, get-rich-quick schemes, Nigerian scams, body enhancement products, phishing sites, malware of various sorts. And then there would be plain old vandalism of the "Lookit my name, u suk ha ha ha" variety.
Take it from someone who's run his own blog for 4.5 years, and leaves old comment threads open. The spammers are very persistent. My server blocks ~1200 POST attempts per week, plus dozens of comment spams make it past the first line to get caught by other methods.
Maybe you'd have some interesting discussions on there. But you'd need to have some way of at least sorting the wheat from the chaff.
Unless you want to create a haven for spammers, in which case you're not likely to find much help here.