(no subject)
As some of you more savvy LJ users know, an audit of journals is taking place based on the list of interests in your profiles.
Here are my thoughts:
1. Rape, incest and pedophilia are disgusting, vile, brutal things. However. Livejournal should be very very careful in banning journals that deal with that sort of thing. I would say the line should only be drawn at journals that could be declared federally illegal, i.e. anything that could have the entire site shut down for and its operators charged with peddling illegal pornography. I understand a business looking out for its own welfare but this purge comes as a direct reaction to pressure from a watchdog group.
I'd feel entirely different if LJ had taken it upon itself, saying "here are things clearly illegal that could land us in a shitload of trouble." instead of buckling under and conforming to the ideals of a group that LJ users are largely unfamiliar with.
2. It's a sticky situation. I'm all for letting a business make its own policies and decisions to look out for its own best interest. And it's easy to say "we didn't make these journals to be audited by Warriors for Innocence" but the fact of the matter is that if you have a journal, you want it to be watched. If you don't take steps (like friends-locking) to ensure that it is only watched by certain people, well then, part of it is on you.
This doesn't mean that I feel what LJ is doing is right. In fact, I think it is on the level of book burning and witch hunting.I'm saying there is a tenuous line of where journal users rights stop and LJ's (as a business) rights begin. Admittedly, as far as I know, there were no explicit warnings of what could be listed as an interest in the TOS of LJ. So in this case "we didn't know" goes a long way. In my gut, do I think we should have to comb over our listed interests carefully to make sure none offend or friends-lock any post that deals with darker subject matter? Hell no. And I'll tell anyone who tells me otherwise to go fuck themselves.
But balancing that out with what LJ has the right to do is difficult. Thats the problem with mixed-idea communities like LJ. There's 12 year olds looking for comms on boy bands and MTV and 50 year old goth guys looking for comms on black lipstick and 37 year old hippies looking for comms on pot and dreadlocks. (I know those are stereotypes. I don't care.)The point is, that when you have a diverse group of people doing a diverse group of things, inevitably someone is going to fall and skin their knee on other people's ideas and go crying to mommy. Personally, I feel like if you don't like it, don't look. Anything grossly and blatantly illegal falls under federal jurisdiction and can be dealt with (really dealt with- as in handcuffs and judges and slidy prison doors) by them.
3. Here's my biggest problem. This whole Warriors for Innocence thing only focuses on rape, incest and pedophilia to protect the children. But what happens the next time a group comes along and says LJ should ban discussion of suicide, self-mutilation, and drugs? After all, aren't those illegal too? Aren't they prevalent in minors? Don't comms and journals that are interested in those things promote their use to people who can't think for themselves because of their age? Then it turns into, well fuck. Then anything that someone thinks is harmful to someone else can't be talked about. What's next? Cigarettes, war, politics, fossil fuels, religion, communism, fatty foods, video games, malt liquor, pesticides, Fox News, cell phones, role playing, inorganic shampoos, mini-skirts, text messaging, air planes, rocking climbing, our shitty public schools, coffee tables, electric blankets, garlic salt, hurricanes, and sharp pieces of glass on the sidewalk?
Why have LJ at all, then.
My final word, to LJ: Don't try to regulate me. I can see where you're coming from and I'll wait this out for a bit and see what happens, but as of right now, I'm leaving. I hope you and the Warriors for Innocence begin a happy celibate life together because you've fucked someone for the last time, and it's yourself.
Here are my thoughts:
1. Rape, incest and pedophilia are disgusting, vile, brutal things. However. Livejournal should be very very careful in banning journals that deal with that sort of thing. I would say the line should only be drawn at journals that could be declared federally illegal, i.e. anything that could have the entire site shut down for and its operators charged with peddling illegal pornography. I understand a business looking out for its own welfare but this purge comes as a direct reaction to pressure from a watchdog group.
I'd feel entirely different if LJ had taken it upon itself, saying "here are things clearly illegal that could land us in a shitload of trouble." instead of buckling under and conforming to the ideals of a group that LJ users are largely unfamiliar with.
2. It's a sticky situation. I'm all for letting a business make its own policies and decisions to look out for its own best interest. And it's easy to say "we didn't make these journals to be audited by Warriors for Innocence" but the fact of the matter is that if you have a journal, you want it to be watched. If you don't take steps (like friends-locking) to ensure that it is only watched by certain people, well then, part of it is on you.
This doesn't mean that I feel what LJ is doing is right. In fact, I think it is on the level of book burning and witch hunting.I'm saying there is a tenuous line of where journal users rights stop and LJ's (as a business) rights begin. Admittedly, as far as I know, there were no explicit warnings of what could be listed as an interest in the TOS of LJ. So in this case "we didn't know" goes a long way. In my gut, do I think we should have to comb over our listed interests carefully to make sure none offend or friends-lock any post that deals with darker subject matter? Hell no. And I'll tell anyone who tells me otherwise to go fuck themselves.
But balancing that out with what LJ has the right to do is difficult. Thats the problem with mixed-idea communities like LJ. There's 12 year olds looking for comms on boy bands and MTV and 50 year old goth guys looking for comms on black lipstick and 37 year old hippies looking for comms on pot and dreadlocks. (I know those are stereotypes. I don't care.)The point is, that when you have a diverse group of people doing a diverse group of things, inevitably someone is going to fall and skin their knee on other people's ideas and go crying to mommy. Personally, I feel like if you don't like it, don't look. Anything grossly and blatantly illegal falls under federal jurisdiction and can be dealt with (really dealt with- as in handcuffs and judges and slidy prison doors) by them.
3. Here's my biggest problem. This whole Warriors for Innocence thing only focuses on rape, incest and pedophilia to protect the children. But what happens the next time a group comes along and says LJ should ban discussion of suicide, self-mutilation, and drugs? After all, aren't those illegal too? Aren't they prevalent in minors? Don't comms and journals that are interested in those things promote their use to people who can't think for themselves because of their age? Then it turns into, well fuck. Then anything that someone thinks is harmful to someone else can't be talked about. What's next? Cigarettes, war, politics, fossil fuels, religion, communism, fatty foods, video games, malt liquor, pesticides, Fox News, cell phones, role playing, inorganic shampoos, mini-skirts, text messaging, air planes, rocking climbing, our shitty public schools, coffee tables, electric blankets, garlic salt, hurricanes, and sharp pieces of glass on the sidewalk?
Why have LJ at all, then.
My final word, to LJ: Don't try to regulate me. I can see where you're coming from and I'll wait this out for a bit and see what happens, but as of right now, I'm leaving. I hope you and the Warriors for Innocence begin a happy celibate life together because you've fucked someone for the last time, and it's yourself.