Hey, you got your righteous indignation in my censorship!
Bandwagon HO!
Okay, so everyone else has something to say, I'm going to also. Obviously, the only thing anyone's interested in is the spate of LJ blog deletions that happened recently.
First, the "LJ has no right! That journal was private property! How dare they?" is completely facetious. LJ is a private venture and reserves all rights to exert any or all control over users, their data, or access that is subject to change at any time (look it up in all that legalese crap you clicked "Accept" to without reading when you joined - I know, I didn't read it either). As such, they can delete anyone at any time for any reason and are directly answerable to no one for it. Now, I really do feel for the targets since there's a lot of lost data out there that was probably pretty precious to the previous owners. However, the point is taken that the lost data could have been preserved and that adequate notice would have allowed such measures.
Now, that being said, responding to anyone annoyed/outraged/dismayed with the current spate of actions with "STFU n00b! It's a business, they do what they want. You have no right to bitch, biotch! LOLZ!!1!eleven!" is your right, but ultimately a misplaced and dimissive stance. Censorship does indeed suck in many previously stated ways and to disallow objections about it is to be a censor.
You can say what you want and you should. Businesses do have specific rights and even the obligation to moderate their own operations including employee behavior, customer activities, etc. Alternately, it is the right and obligation of the customer to decry perceived gaps in delivered service or unfair treatment. Now, the customer runs the risk of becoming a victim him- or herself of the dreaded blog-wipe o' Doom in retaliation for criticism, but the company faces repercussions from indescriminate or careless activities against their customer base. It's a balancing act; that's the beauty of capitalism. Each side needs to address the other. The actions they have taken will result in some difficult repercussions and no one likes change, but it does seem like they are honestly trying to approach things responsibly, if a bit heavy-handed and probably lacking some grace.
So, to summarize:
1. If you disagree with the actions taken, speak out about it in coherent and logical arguments or withdraw your support altogether by leaving LJ completely. LJ is teh SUXXORz! messages don't really hurt anyone but yourself.
2. If you agree that the LJ management is not a cabal of Nazi stormtroopers, but are instead concerned and responsible business owners making decisions that are theirs to make, state that in coherent and logical arguments because "UR teh FAIL at HATING LJ!" is equally unhelpful.
Both sides are right. It's that simple. Ultimately, how LJ management responds is up to them, but they have definitely shown that they're interested in taking user feedback into account on both sides of the argument.
Make your voice count, not just loud!
Okay, so everyone else has something to say, I'm going to also. Obviously, the only thing anyone's interested in is the spate of LJ blog deletions that happened recently.
First, the "LJ has no right! That journal was private property! How dare they?" is completely facetious. LJ is a private venture and reserves all rights to exert any or all control over users, their data, or access that is subject to change at any time (look it up in all that legalese crap you clicked "Accept" to without reading when you joined - I know, I didn't read it either). As such, they can delete anyone at any time for any reason and are directly answerable to no one for it. Now, I really do feel for the targets since there's a lot of lost data out there that was probably pretty precious to the previous owners. However, the point is taken that the lost data could have been preserved and that adequate notice would have allowed such measures.
Now, that being said, responding to anyone annoyed/outraged/dismayed with the current spate of actions with "STFU n00b! It's a business, they do what they want. You have no right to bitch, biotch! LOLZ!!1!eleven!" is your right, but ultimately a misplaced and dimissive stance. Censorship does indeed suck in many previously stated ways and to disallow objections about it is to be a censor.
You can say what you want and you should. Businesses do have specific rights and even the obligation to moderate their own operations including employee behavior, customer activities, etc. Alternately, it is the right and obligation of the customer to decry perceived gaps in delivered service or unfair treatment. Now, the customer runs the risk of becoming a victim him- or herself of the dreaded blog-wipe o' Doom in retaliation for criticism, but the company faces repercussions from indescriminate or careless activities against their customer base. It's a balancing act; that's the beauty of capitalism. Each side needs to address the other. The actions they have taken will result in some difficult repercussions and no one likes change, but it does seem like they are honestly trying to approach things responsibly, if a bit heavy-handed and probably lacking some grace.
So, to summarize:
1. If you disagree with the actions taken, speak out about it in coherent and logical arguments or withdraw your support altogether by leaving LJ completely. LJ is teh SUXXORz! messages don't really hurt anyone but yourself.
2. If you agree that the LJ management is not a cabal of Nazi stormtroopers, but are instead concerned and responsible business owners making decisions that are theirs to make, state that in coherent and logical arguments because "UR teh FAIL at HATING LJ!" is equally unhelpful.
Both sides are right. It's that simple. Ultimately, how LJ management responds is up to them, but they have definitely shown that they're interested in taking user feedback into account on both sides of the argument.
Make your voice count, not just loud!