I'm no Fey: ;)

[ex_uniquewo]

Plus, I'm lazy and it's pretty late here so I'm just gonna quote news, 'k?

"We've also added an opt-out setting for virtual gifts. Paid members can choose to disable receiving all virtual gifts, or just of sponsored v-gifts. That setting is also found on the Viewing Options page

Comments

[mskala]

I think one reason I find both WFI's and jackandahat's tactics objectionable is that they're equating the content posted by Livejournal's users with the content of Livejournal itself. Writing to a magazine's advertisers to say "Did you know your ads are running in a magazine that prints these objectionable articles?" is different from writing to LJ's advertisers to say "Did you know your ads are running on a Web site that posts this objectionable content?" because Livejournal doesn't exercise editorial control in the same way a magazine does, and it shouldn't.

You can reasonably hold the print magazine responsible for everything in it because they exercise editorial control. If you start trying to hold Livejournal directly responsible for everything users do, then they'll start exercising a lot more editorial control than they do now. Basic corporate behaviour: they won't put themselves in a position to be punished for other people's actions they can't control. A major increase in Livejournal's editorial control is the result WFI seems to want. I don't know if it's a result jackandahat wants. But it's certainly not a result I want.