Ain't no drama like LJ drama

[sigma7]

As per usual, warren_ellis shows us the way:

For what it’s worth: Warriors For Innocence come off a little weird, to say the least. Mind you, so does Andrew Vachss. But LiveJournal’s response bears more study. Their sloppy, blanket response indicates that they simply don’t have a process in place to differentiate between nonce-news and people writing about furry widdle brother and sister unicorns who love each other very much.

The outcome, therefore, has been pure comedy, with comments that read very much like “I love spending all day reading about forced underage incestuous sex with squirrel fisting on top, but of course I’m not interested in that in real life — that’d make me a pervert!”

LiveJournal is part of Six Apart, which has in times past proved itself to be, shall we say, socially backwards. They’re not good at dealing with people. The questions of importance are less about the somewhat gung-ho and poorly informed Warriors For Innocence, and more about the panicked spasm LiveJournal had, that appears to have had very little thought put into it.

All that said: if you listed “rape” as an interest on your LiveJournal user profile, you must have known that someday someone was coming to see you about that.

Comments

[gloomchen.livejournal.com]

As I've said before... if someone wants to write about underage incestuous sex with squirrel fisting, better to let them write about it than find some OTHER outlet for their fantasies/fetishes/whatever. Never mind that there's nothing unusual about rape fantasies and knife play, yet depending on what exactly was put into one's interest list, LJ made the choice that one was "indecent" just for mentioning it.

I do agree that I'm pointing the finger at LJ at this one. The watchdog group has been saying they handed specific names over to LJ, names of journals and communities that specifically talked about committing illegal acts (real or fiction, that I don't know). Alright, fine, understood even if gone about the wrong way. But what happened next, that's all on LJ's head. If a community was fine for FOUR YEARS yet now somehow is "indecent", seriously... how in the hell were they supposed to know?

Sigh. I've converted everything prior to 2007 to friends-only and will do the rest when I get home and can properly post something that will stay public. I don't need someone wandering by, deciding that something I said is "indecent", reporting it to LJ and have the banhammer hit before I even had a clue that I'd caused a ruckus. I know my own intentions, and none of them are "indecent". However, without the chance to defend myself, I have to choose the path to preemptively watch out for my own best interest.

[rewil.livejournal.com]

Further, and more sensibly, this was just pointed out over at f_w.

And out of all this, the Nabokov discussion group is still the one that gets me.

[sigma7.livejournal.com]

Quite a change from his post earlier in the day. Yes, this is unfolding in the most unexpected ways as the day drags on. (I felt bad for the user whose birth name is Lolita, and who got her address kicked off Hotmail because of it.)

Someone else -- somewhere -- also pointed out that LJ's takedown of these comms/users is against the procedure outlined in their own TOS. I'm more and more glad they never coughed up info on the permanent accounts.