and leave us only to imagine about the things some do in the dark...
To pick up from here...
LJ's made a statement with regards to this weekend's fireworks.
At first glance, this seems to be some progress. Even if we don't like them, hey, they are at least laying out the rules that they're going to enforce. That's good, right?
Except:
- They say that they will not edit the TOS to include these clarifications. Their reasoning is that the TOS "is not a document designed to detail every specific situation"; their enumerated list is in reference to various potential violations of Section XVI, Part 1. Fair enough (maybe). Still, many of us are asking that this list at least be linked to from the TOS to keep people better informed; we also want a news post referencing these specifications, because people who haven't been keeping a close watch on the kerfluffle might not otherwise read lj_biz. I know I wouldn't.
- In their Q&A section, they provide a link to "[the] definitions of graphic, visual depiction, and sexually explicit conduct" they will be using. But if you read all the way to the bottom, you discover this little gem: "This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults."
So they pick a legal definition to use as a standard, but that definition doesn't apply to the thing they seem most intent on policing. Great.
- Also, given that this is the "Illegal and Harmful Content Policy," many of us are asking if now they'll start cracking down more on things like pro-anorexia communities. Their response in the past (and I mean yesterday) has been less than stellar. Seriously. Read the response to that abuse report. Their justification makes me nauseous.
- Part of the policy describes that "possessing, displaying or transmitting" stuff that violates the IaHCP will result in their intervention. This raises the question of if an artist should post her art to a non-LJ related site/server and simply have a link (not even a thumbnail of the art) in her journal, could she be suspended? Is that the "transmitting" they are worried about? Right now, we don't know.
Every time I think this is going to get better, it gets a little bit worse. If they can answer these questions and clear things up even more, I might start feeling better. But that means they have to answer questions first, and I'm sorry, but they aren't so good at that.
Fuck this shit. I'm going to write porn where my RP character has sadomasochistic sex with Satan before that violates the TOS, too.
LJ's made a statement with regards to this weekend's fireworks.
At first glance, this seems to be some progress. Even if we don't like them, hey, they are at least laying out the rules that they're going to enforce. That's good, right?
Except:
- They say that they will not edit the TOS to include these clarifications. Their reasoning is that the TOS "is not a document designed to detail every specific situation"; their enumerated list is in reference to various potential violations of Section XVI, Part 1. Fair enough (maybe). Still, many of us are asking that this list at least be linked to from the TOS to keep people better informed; we also want a news post referencing these specifications, because people who haven't been keeping a close watch on the kerfluffle might not otherwise read lj_biz. I know I wouldn't.
- In their Q&A section, they provide a link to "[the] definitions of graphic, visual depiction, and sexually explicit conduct" they will be using. But if you read all the way to the bottom, you discover this little gem: "This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults."
So they pick a legal definition to use as a standard, but that definition doesn't apply to the thing they seem most intent on policing. Great.
- Also, given that this is the "Illegal and Harmful Content Policy," many of us are asking if now they'll start cracking down more on things like pro-anorexia communities. Their response in the past (and I mean yesterday) has been less than stellar. Seriously. Read the response to that abuse report. Their justification makes me nauseous.
- Part of the policy describes that "possessing, displaying or transmitting" stuff that violates the IaHCP will result in their intervention. This raises the question of if an artist should post her art to a non-LJ related site/server and simply have a link (not even a thumbnail of the art) in her journal, could she be suspended? Is that the "transmitting" they are worried about? Right now, we don't know.
Every time I think this is going to get better, it gets a little bit worse. If they can answer these questions and clear things up even more, I might start feeling better. But that means they have to answer questions first, and I'm sorry, but they aren't so good at that.
Fuck this shit. I'm going to write porn where my RP character has sadomasochistic sex with Satan before that violates the TOS, too.