Deep, calming breaths...

[smeddley]

I'm not going to say anything about "Strikethrough Two: Electric Boldaloo" (sadly, not my name, it's from Fandom Wank, credit where credit is due). I'm not... I'm not... *grits teeth* Yeah, who am I kidding?

I've read up on it. I've seen the pictures in question. I've read the entries that say people shouldn't be outraged, it's not LJ's fault (though, if I may say something to this - even if it were not LJ's fault, you can still be upset about the way they handled it. I may *deserve* a speeding ticket, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to complain if the cop giving it to me is a complete ass about it!). I've read pages of cat macros. I've read the e-mails from LJ to the people who were deleted, and responses from LJ to people who questioned the deletion. I've wasted most of an evening, yes, and that irritates me as well.

So LJ is now judging things on 'artistic merit' and finding them 'obscene' and deleting not only the account that posted them, but any account with the same e-mail address (including, according to reports, a transfered account that still had the e-mail address 'attached' to it). They've changed the standard for a deleted account (when you type it) from the icon and name struck through to no icon and a bold name. So were I to be deleted for... uh, objectionable rubber duck pics?... and you typed in <lj user=smeddley> you'd see: smeddley when you posted. And they are quite silent in the face of the numerous comments (and cat macros). They STILL have not addressed any of the concerns voiced in the last 'clarifications' go-round. Many of which were some very good points, if you wade through the butt-kissing 'thanks!' posts and the cat macros to find them. Also, they've begun screening comments on the news posts, most notably the ones that are listing advertisers for people to contact. I think that speaks VOLUMES right there.

Let me say this for the record. As a private company, LJ has EVERY RIGHT to delete whatever they want for whatever reason (or no reason at all). As consumers, the only things we can do are 1) complain and 2) withhold our custom.

Please, though, ease up on the cat macros. Yes, you're showing persistence in posting, but at least make them posts with points (there are more than enough things to be concerned about, and when it doubt, repeat a question!).

And lastly, people are a little upset with the 'report abuse' link that shows up on every post. Perhaps making it a bit to easy for people with hair-trigger 'I'm offended' buttons (like the people who are upset when it's assumed a 'person' with a vagina is a 'woman' - yeah, it's the who transgendered thing, I know, but biologically speaking, if you have a vagina you are female.) to get click-happy... If I weren't so lazy (and y'all know I am) I'd create multiple dummy accounts linked to multiple dummy e-mail addresses and (from the library, not to sully my IP address) seek out the most non-offensive posts I can find and *click*click*click* away. But that would be petty and juvenile (and ultimately only really bother the Abuse Team, and they are volunteers) so the only thing I can do is think really, really hard about giving LJ any more money.

Comments

[gelsey.livejournal.com]

I'm totally staying out of it this time.

I have enough angst in my life without cat macros, lol ;)

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

I hear you. I'm pretty much just going to keep a wary eye on this one, but unless something major happens I'm going to leave it at this post.

[clare-dragonfly.livejournal.com]

Also, they've begun screening comments on the news posts

What. The. Fuck.

It wouldn't bother me that LJ is censoring content if they were clear, honest, and consistent about it. It doesn't bother me that LHC and Neopets do that. But that's because the rules are very clear and up-front, and everyone who breaks them gets the same consequences. LJ? Not so much.

[penchaft.livejournal.com]

According to f_w all/a majority of the screened posts were the fanart that got journals banned.

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

Well, one of the people who was screened said their post concerned contacting advertisers, giving names and addresses for people to contact.

But, I only have their word on that. I could scroll through all those pages again and see if I saw those posts again (and if not, assume they were screened). But I'm too lazy for that.

[foxfirefey]

They were, I saw it the original posts like that.

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

See, that's a bit concerning. I can understand screening the picture (since it was bad enough for banning and all,they have to stand behind that), but to screen a comment where someone is calming suggesting a coherent course of action and providing the info to act? Well, that's a whole different ball game.

And I, too, saw a post on the topic, and there was nothing inciting or nasty about it. A person simply said, 'Hey, I turned on ads on one of my junk journals and these are the people that came up. Perhaps if we contact them and told them their money was supporting an unprofessional company and we are unlikely to buy from them for as long as they continue to do so, they might pressure LJ into at least making a statement.'

It seemed pretty level-headed and passive, and for them to screen that really says stuff about them. Not good stuff, either.

And I just saw screencaps of the whole efw wank. I'm pretty sure if I worked for LJ I'd have two very separate accounts, and never the twain shall meet. I mean, it's not like I go around work as 'smeddley', or attach a link to my website/LJ to my e-mails.

I kinda miss efw, I quit when a bunch of people I didn't like showed up. :(

</rambling pre-caffeine comment>

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

I know, I don't like what the people were posting (really not my thing!) but... there's a lot of other stuff getting posted and reported that isn't getting deleted. And some of it's worse that this!

They have such fuzzy, indistinct rules and they're not applying them uniformly. That's what's annoying. I don't mind following the rules if you tell me what they are and enforce them fairly.

[nicked-metal.livejournal.com]

Regarding the strikethrough thing (sorry that I forgot to address that in the discussion in my journal), that's normal when it comes to suspended accounts, they've always looked perfectly normal until you click on them. Given that accounts are frequently un-suspended, I think it's appropriate to reserve the strikethrough effect for those accounts where the account-holder has decided to delete them.

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

No, they really changed it. Last time when you typed in a person's name who had a journal suspended (and there were plenty last time, so I saw it a lot) it looked like this: smeddley. NOW it would look like this: smeddley (also, its no longer a link). That's a big change, and with no real reason.

[foxfirefey]

Yes, it is a change and the release notes to it are here:

http://community.livejournal.com/lj_releases/22857.html?format=light

[nicked-metal.livejournal.com]

I stand corrected!

One would assume in this age of increased communication, that people would start to recognize the futility of trying to cover things up. Especially if they're in the communication business :/

[foxfirefey]

I honestly don't think it was an attempt to cover it up. LJ has been making lots of little changes like this for a long while now, and they keep a very public log of what they do in that community. It was just an unfortunate coincidence that it happened in tandem with this incident.

[nicked-metal.livejournal.com]

That's true. Having spent a reasonable portion of the last week defending LJ's volunteers, I'm feeling pretty pissed off at the people at the top of the pyramid, though.

[oneworldvision.livejournal.com]

You know, this whole thing is making me wish I'd previously had money to give LJ, just so I could do the whole yanking-it-away thing now. Saying I'll never give them any money ever, regardless of how true it might be, kind of falls flat when I never gave them money in the first place. But: I'll never give them any money ever.

And I agree with you on the cat macros. That trend is so over, anyway.

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there are a few funny ones, but if you want people to take your concerns seriously you have to present them seriously. It's the adult thing to do!

I've given them money, and I won't say that I regret it (I enjoy being able to post polls and have 100 icons!) but I can say I'm waffling on giving them any more. I have until December to see where this goes. I mean, by then SA may not even own LJ anymore, or there might not even be an LJ, so... we'll just have to wait and see.

[oneworldvision.livejournal.com]

Oh, I can't imagine the wank that would go one if there suddenly wasn't an LJ, especially after they just had a big permanent account sale. That would bring the macros.

[penchaft.livejournal.com]

ONCE AGAIN, people I don't like* are getting banned and annoyed. Wheeeeeeeee! HEY GUYS, STFU AND DON'T POST YOUR TERRIBLE THINGS UN-FLOCKED AND UN-LINKED.

* Except for mightygodking, but three DCMAs is fair enough reason for a banning, I suppose.

[smeddley.livejournal.com]

The DCMA thing is different, though, since that IS something outside of LJ's control. There, for once, they 'did what they had to do'.

I didn't like what was being posted, but it's crap 'customer service' on LJ's part, and since I do give them money I expect better. Man, I couldn't treat the residents this way (though I wish I could, how awesome would it be to just be able to do whatever I want and ignore them?!). It's just bad business, and if they keep this up the company will go under and there will be no more LJ. Or, they'll turn to pure advertising for money and LJ will just be MySpace. :(