Comments | geekette8: Livejournal strike

geekette8

Livejournal strike

Jun 01, 2006 15:14

In case any of you haven't heard, there's an LJ Strike planned for 06/06/06.

Read more about why. I won't be deleting my journal but I will be refraining from posting or commenting from midday UTC on Monday 5th June until midday UTC on Wednesday 7th June ( Read more... )

Comments 10

emperor June 1 2006, 14:41:54 UTC

I'm a bit confused by all this, really. Can the LJ admins not produce a statement, or something, so we know what's going on?

emperor June 1 2006, 14:57:00 UTC

...and furthermore, has anyone e.g. opened an LJ suggestion to request that FAQ 111 be reverted?

cangetmad June 1 2006, 15:24:02 UTC

I did, just now. We'll see if it makes it onto the community.

catyak June 1 2006, 15:00:21 UTC

Even The Register picked it up :-)

Not necessarily the slant the BF group might want, though.

D

Perhaps I'm in the minority . . . gwendraith June 1 2006, 15:47:56 UTC

. . . and I'm probably going to be controversial here. I'm totally for breastfeeding, I breast fed my own two for 6 and 8 months, and in public when the need arose. However, I was discreet, always aware that it makes some people uncomfortable, even if they aren't sure why. I personally think there's been an over reaction to all this. I do think LJ are right to ask users not to have breast feeding as default icons. As far as I'm aware they aren't asking people to not use them at all. I'll stand corrected if that isn't the case. I know breastfeeding is beautiful etc, but there are users who would prefer not to see breast feeding icons for a number of reasons, and there are employers who might be curious as to what John or Jane Doe are doing when they glimpse a naked breast [with or without a baby attached]. Everyone has rights and preferences, the trick is to find the balance. The rules are there for a reason and, although not everyone will agree with them, LJ have the right to set those rules or change them if they so wish. They ( ... )

Re: Perhaps I'm in the minority . . . jentifred June 1 2006, 17:52:32 UTC

What's getting under my skin is the inconsistency. The Abuse team will say that one icon is okay, but another showing far less breast/areola will be banned. They say they are following FCC standards, which they are not (FCC apparently has a breastfeeding exemption to their own indecency rules). In other words, it's less about the content of the pictures than the fact that the rules are being applied arbitrarily and inconsistently. Not to mention that said rules were quietly changed after all this started and the Abuse team has tried to make it sound like those were always the rules.

Re: Perhaps I'm in the minority . . . gwendraith June 1 2006, 18:34:06 UTC

I agree. Inconsistency is annoying, whether it's changing rules back and forth or in what constitutes 'inappropriate'. Maybe this whole thing will encourage LiveJournal to look at the whole issue of icons and get together more agreeable and consistent guidelines. They need balance but how they do that I'm not quite sure. What offends one person, amuses another. I suppose the basic rule of thumb re: default icons should be - if you think some people might be offended or an employer might take exception, don't use it as a default icon. There's plenty of opportunity for posting possible contentious icons in the comments. It's all about respecting each other.

Re: Perhaps I'm in the minority . . . k425 June 2 2006, 07:44:53 UTC

*coff*
If an employer might be offended, there's a fair chance the reader shouldn't be LJing at work. Regardless of the icon.

Thread 5

_moggy_ June 22 2006, 14:24:43 UTC

Hi,

I've emailed you regarding the ladies loos book - could you let me know if the email doesn't come through?

thanks,
Natasha