Open Letter To LiveJournal/Six Apart
Dear LiveJournal and Six Apart:
We are all users of your service. We came here for a variety of reasons. We stayed because we like it here, and because we put a lot of time and energy into building and maintaining a community here. We honestly don't want to leave. However, lately some of your actions -- and lack thereof -- have us questioning whether we are wanted and welcome here, and whether our efforts would be better spent building a new community elsewhere. We would prefer that not happen and we are relatively hopeful that you would prefer that not to happen either. There are a lot of us. In fandom alone, we number upwards of 35,000 members according to fandom_counts. But we are not all members of fandom. Many of us, inside and outside of fandom, are academics and/or creative professionals who use LiveJournal for our professional lives, and who can't continue to do so without clear and concise guidelines. Some of us are writers of fiction and non-fiction books, who can't continue to use LiveJournal if we are not certain that our art is safe here. Some of us are simply users who have friends in fandom. Others are concerned that our content may eventually come into question as well, and yet others of us are simply concerned for the fate of LiveJournal as a whole if a large segment of its community decides to leave it. Our signatures below are representative of a much larger group of people who are voicing their opinions to you on these issues in a variety of different ways.
The first thing that we would like to do is to thank you for your recent post in lj_biz. We appreciate your attempt to answer some of the questions that we as a community have been posing. In an effort to continue the dialogue opened in that post in a manner that can be beneficial to all of us, and which will allow us to be partners in solving this group of problems, rather than adversaries, we have written the following list of concerns accompanied by suggestions of how you can easily resolve them so that we can all go back to the business of using our LiveJournals for their original intentions rather than to address these concerns.
We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
1,121 (and counting) Concerned Users
Actual signatures of users can be seen in the comments located at http://bubble-blunder.livejournal.com/82091.html for verification.
We are all users of your service. We came here for a variety of reasons. We stayed because we like it here, and because we put a lot of time and energy into building and maintaining a community here. We honestly don't want to leave. However, lately some of your actions -- and lack thereof -- have us questioning whether we are wanted and welcome here, and whether our efforts would be better spent building a new community elsewhere. We would prefer that not happen and we are relatively hopeful that you would prefer that not to happen either. There are a lot of us. In fandom alone, we number upwards of 35,000 members according to fandom_counts. But we are not all members of fandom. Many of us, inside and outside of fandom, are academics and/or creative professionals who use LiveJournal for our professional lives, and who can't continue to do so without clear and concise guidelines. Some of us are writers of fiction and non-fiction books, who can't continue to use LiveJournal if we are not certain that our art is safe here. Some of us are simply users who have friends in fandom. Others are concerned that our content may eventually come into question as well, and yet others of us are simply concerned for the fate of LiveJournal as a whole if a large segment of its community decides to leave it. Our signatures below are representative of a much larger group of people who are voicing their opinions to you on these issues in a variety of different ways.
The first thing that we would like to do is to thank you for your recent post in lj_biz. We appreciate your attempt to answer some of the questions that we as a community have been posing. In an effort to continue the dialogue opened in that post in a manner that can be beneficial to all of us, and which will allow us to be partners in solving this group of problems, rather than adversaries, we have written the following list of concerns accompanied by suggestions of how you can easily resolve them so that we can all go back to the business of using our LiveJournals for their original intentions rather than to address these concerns.
- Our largest issue continues to be with the ambiguity of the current Terms of Service and Illegal and Harmful Content Policy and how they are applied. While we applaud your latest effort to clarify your policies regarding prohibited content in the lj_biz community, comments to this post have indicated that many of your users are still having difficulty understanding exactly what you mean by these clarifying statements. We are not arguing your rights to make rules regarding what content that you are and are not willing to host. We will gladly make an effort to follow those rules, once we understand what they are. Unfortunately we don't. And despite repeated attempts to find out through the comments of your posts on the subject, we still need answers to some of our questions.
- Our solution to this problem would be that you provide, publicly, a copy of any guidelines that have been given to the LJ Abuse Team that allow them to determine what is and is not prohibited content, since many fans have found the statements that have been made in the lj_biz announcements to be unnecessarily ambiguous.
If we understand your statements in this post correctly, there is content that you are unwilling to host regardless of the legality of it. Our concern is primarily with this content, and with ascertaining whether you consider art and/or text that contains mention or portrayals of fictional, underage characters in sexual or graphic situations to be child pornography that you would report to the appropriate authorities. While we understand that there have been many points raised by all sides of this issue regarding legalities and what is or is not legal and under what statutes, we would prefer that discussion stay out of this one as much as possible. We are more concerned with what content you consider to be illegal and/or are simply unwilling to host regardless of its legal status. Specifically, we would like clarification of the following:
- Is all art that suggests a minor in a sexual situation prohibited, even if it is not sexually explicit and contains no nudity?
- Is sexually-explicit text about a minor in a sexual situation prohibited?
- Is non-sexually-explicit text about a minor in a sexual situation prohibited?
- Does the age of the depicted minor (seven vs. seventeen, for instance) affect whether the text or art is prohibited?
- Will all prohibited art/text be reported to the authorities as child pornography? If not, how will LJ distinguish between what is illegal and must be reported, and what is a non-illegal violation of the TOS?
- Is all art that suggests a minor in a sexual situation prohibited, even if it is not sexually explicit and contains no nudity?
- We would like the following questions to be answered:
- Will posting a text link (as opposed to an image tag that actually loads the content to the LiveJournal page) to prohibited content that is hosted elsewhere receive the same punishment as it would if the prohibited content were posted on LiveJournal's servers? We would be given to understand that it isn't, based on this statement. However, a statement made by a LiveJournal staff member here indicates that your prohibited content policy will apply to remotely loaded content that is hosted elsewhere, and re-posted correspondence between a user and a member of the LiveJournal Abuse Team here appears to state that even text links to such content that don't involve embedded content may be violations under your TOS. We would like to clarify your policy on text links to content that is hosted and loaded at another site, as well as your policy on embedded content that is hosted at another site and loads on LiveJournal pages.
- In this post made on July 19, 2007, it was stated that the Miller Test is what will be used to determine whether or not content meets the definition for obscenity, and is, as such, prohibited content. This statement appeared to be reaffirmed in the reposting of communication between a member of the LJ Abuse Team and another user here. Is this still the case? If the Miller Test is going to be used, who will be the judge of artistic or political merit as is called for in it? How will this be judged? What objective or subjective criteria will Livejournal apply? Will the standards used to judge text vary from those used to judge artwork? We are also confused regarding how the community standard that is called for in the Miller Test is being determined. Is it San Francisco, the employees of LiveJournal and/or Six Apart, the members of the LJ Abuse Team, the community that the content was posted in, or some other standard? We are not averse to a community standard being used, but we can't abide by a community standard if we aren't clear on the community setting it.
- Will the obscenity policy be applied retroactively? If content that was posted before these rules were announced is reported, will it result in the permanent suspension of the user who posted it or will the user simply be asked to remove the content?
- In your statement on lj_biz you stated that a 3 strikes rule as opposed to immediate permanent suspension was not an option for journals which contain illegal content. Would this type of rule perhaps be a possibility in cases where the objectionable content is content that you are unwilling to host but which is not illegal and being reported to the appropriate authorities? Even a one warning system and removal of the objectionable entry would be preferable to permanently deleting users who didn't realize that the content of their post was against the rules. This would give them the opportunity to become better educated about what the boundaries are, and to then refrain from posting the offending content in the future. It would also go a long way toward helping to quell the rising fear and hysteria regarding suspensions and rebuilding trust between LiveJournal/Six Apart and their userbase.
- Will posting a text link (as opposed to an image tag that actually loads the content to the LiveJournal page) to prohibited content that is hosted elsewhere receive the same punishment as it would if the prohibited content were posted on LiveJournal's servers? We would be given to understand that it isn't, based on this statement. However, a statement made by a LiveJournal staff member here indicates that your prohibited content policy will apply to remotely loaded content that is hosted elsewhere, and re-posted correspondence between a user and a member of the LiveJournal Abuse Team here appears to state that even text links to such content that don't involve embedded content may be violations under your TOS. We would like to clarify your policy on text links to content that is hosted and loaded at another site, as well as your policy on embedded content that is hosted at another site and loads on LiveJournal pages.
- Our solution to this problem would be that you provide, publicly, a copy of any guidelines that have been given to the LJ Abuse Team that allow them to determine what is and is not prohibited content, since many fans have found the statements that have been made in the lj_biz announcements to be unnecessarily ambiguous.
- Another issue that has come up repeatedly of late is the way that LiveJournal and/or Six Apart handles complaints from their userbase. Based on press coverage of Rojo it appears that this may be a problem that Six Apart is struggling with on more than just the LiveJournal front. When users start asking for answers, we tend to get irate if our questions and concerns are ignored or not addressed for long periods of time. This is especially true when the corporation does respond to press inquiries on the issue.
- One possible solution to this problem would be for LiveJournal and/or Six Apart to hire a consumer relations specialist whose sole responsibility is to interact with their userbase and address their concerns. If this is not possible, then perhaps a committee made up of representatives of the various "communities" that have cropped up on LiveJournal could be formed to give input to LiveJournal and/or Six Apart regarding the likely reactions and concerns that policy changes may raise before announcements are made so that ambiguities can be cleared up and questions can be answered at the time that the announcements are made. Members of this committee or panel could also act as sort of Ombudsmen or Liaisons between corporate and the userbase.
- We would also like to suggest that all corporate communications take place via journals that are not used by LiveJournal and/or Six Apart team members for their personal, non-corporate communications, and that the icons used on these journals make LiveJournal and Six Apart staffers easy to identify. Alternatively, require LiveJournal and Six Apart employees to use a standard "staff" icon when they are posting professionally, and their own personal icons only when they are posting personally.
- It might also be helpful if LiveJournal staffers who address user questions within the comments of official posts be required to do so in a more professional manner, and that they have the authority to make statements on the behalf of the company. Unfortunately, burr86's comments in the personal journal of a user led many to a false belief regarding what the obscenity policy would and would not prohibit, when, in fact, he was not authorized to speak for the company regarding the specifics of the policy. When his comments turned out to be in opposition to what was done when suspending journals, this lowered the credibility of LiveJournal and Six Apart, leading to distrust of the company by many users.
- It would also be beneficial to address these issues with regards to the LiveJournal Abuse Team, a group that has encountered numerous complaints over a period of years regarding their lack of transparency, and with LiveJournal Support. There is a perception that LiveJournal is not following its own rules. This perception is likely to remain until a level of transparency is in place to prove otherwise. Ideally, we would like to see you define and document a standard process for:
- Receiving complaints/questions.
- Evaluating complaints/questions.
- Notifying the user of receipt of a complaint/question.
- Taking action and notifying the user of the action taken, if any.
- Providing the user with an avenue of review or appeal.
- One possible solution to this problem would be for LiveJournal and/or Six Apart to hire a consumer relations specialist whose sole responsibility is to interact with their userbase and address their concerns. If this is not possible, then perhaps a committee made up of representatives of the various "communities" that have cropped up on LiveJournal could be formed to give input to LiveJournal and/or Six Apart regarding the likely reactions and concerns that policy changes may raise before announcements are made so that ambiguities can be cleared up and questions can be answered at the time that the announcements are made. Members of this committee or panel could also act as sort of Ombudsmen or Liaisons between corporate and the userbase.
- Due to many, many issues that have taken place over the past two years, such as the addition of advertisers to LiveJournal; the handling of breastfeeding icons as default icons; the suspension, reinstatement (in many cases), and (in a few cases) repeated suspension of approximately 500 journals due to the interests that they listed; and now, the lack of clarity of obscenity policies that has resulted in the permanent suspension of at least two users and the issuance of a warning to a very popular Harry Potter community, many users have lost all trust in LiveJournal and Six Apart.
This has not been helped by press coverage during the suspension of hundreds of journals, press coverage of the Rojo incident, and press coverage followed by the subsequent announcement on his personal journal of the departure from LiveJournal and Six Apart of Brad Fitzpatrick, founder of LiveJournal. If your userbase doesn't learn to trust you again, it seems obvious that they will also feel little loyalty to you and may decide to use another provider at the first opportunity.
- Our suggestion for solving this problem can be summed up in two phrases: transparency of business practices and better customer relations. Both of these issues are largely lacking at LiveJournal and/or Six Apart. Users should never feel that the owners of the site consider them incidental or unimportant. However, due to the way that your company has repeatedly chosen to address its userbase, that is how a large portion of them have been made to feel. It will likely take professionals in the field of consumer relations to sort this out.
- One suggestion is that you hire someone who is knowledgeable of the different sub-groups on LiveJournal to act as a mouthpiece for LiveJournal and Six Apart when the users are being addressed. This method seemed to be very helpful when advertising was initially brought in and an advertising professional was appointed who had the authority to make decisions and answer questions. Ideally, due to the sheer size of the userbase in question, you may need to hire a team of people whose job would be to interact with users in this capacity. In addition to assisting in regaining your company's credibility with its users, this could also be beneficial in terms of discovering what changes your users would like to see with the site, what they would and would not be willing to pay for, and what they love and desperately don't want to see changed. Enacting even a fraction of the ideas gleaned from user input to consumer relations could revive lagging active account numbers, increase your credibility with your users, and bring back those users who have already left LiveJournal.
- We would also suggest that you give some serious consideration to finding a way to bring users together with LiveJournal and/or Six Apart staff in a setting that would allow collaboration and cooperation to achieve a balance between what is good for the business and what is good for the userbase. This, too, would assist you in rebuilding some of the trust that has been lost.
We thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
1,121 (and counting) Concerned Users
Actual signatures of users can be seen in the comments located at http://bubble-blunder.livejournal.com/82091.html for verification.