Okay, their goal was "become a centralized social networking hub for profit." I should've been clearer. I didn't think they were trying to become a centralized social networking hub for the betterment of society, alas.
hey could give a warning, they could delete the post, they could insist the user make it private
I don't know about deleting the post, but it's my understanding that the other two options leave LJ open to severe liability. Quoting myself from another reply:
LJ opens itself up to huge liability if it says, basically, "Hi, we found images depicting minors in sexual situations on your blog. Please enjoy a few days' reprieve to move your work elsewhere and back it up before we take it down." Ditto with leaving a picture up while LJ tries to...what? Figure out whether the artist was thinking of Harry as over or under the age of majority at the time of the drawing?
And like I've said, yeah, it's bad customer service, they could do better. My point here is that I think this happens because they are confused, not because they are attempting to extinguish fandom, cause a fandom holocaust, chase fandom off of LJ, or any of the other (IMO) overreactions I've read lately.
I don't think they're trying to extinguish fandom, I think they're indifferent to fandom and to fans, which is fine except for how it is that we're among their customers. They've had plenty of time to learn how to do this. The only company I regularly interact with that seems to have less concern for how it treats its clients is eBay, which seems to actually have it in for its large sellers. So, they keep proving they don't know how to provide good customer service, to communicate effectively with their customers, etc., then where's my incentive to stick around? because it's got good up-time? That's not enough.
Okay, their goal was "become a centralized social networking hub for profit." I should've been clearer. I didn't think they were trying to become a centralized social networking hub for the betterment of society, alas.
hey could give a warning, they could delete the post, they could insist the user make it private
I don't know about deleting the post, but it's my understanding that the other two options leave LJ open to severe liability. Quoting myself from another reply:
LJ opens itself up to huge liability if it says, basically, "Hi, we found images depicting minors in sexual situations on your blog. Please enjoy a few days' reprieve to move your work elsewhere and back it up before we take it down." Ditto with leaving a picture up while LJ tries to...what? Figure out whether the artist was thinking of Harry as over or under the age of majority at the time of the drawing?
And like I've said, yeah, it's bad customer service, they could do better. My point here is that I think this happens because they are confused, not because they are attempting to extinguish fandom, cause a fandom holocaust, chase fandom off of LJ, or any of the other (IMO) overreactions I've read lately.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment