Previous Entry | Next Entry

LJ - Yes, still talking about it.

  • Aug. 9th, 2007 at 9:43 AM
naanima: ([Baby] Tired and antisocial)
OK, you know what pisses me off about the whole thing - it isn't the deletion of journals, it isn't the covering of their corporate asses, it isn't even their obvious attempts to make profit. They are a company, they are in danger of law suits, and they have a right to make profit. No, those things doesn’t really bother me, it annoys me but it doesn't anger me, what makes my blood boil is Livejournal's complete and utter DISRESPECT to their customers (paying or otherwise).

You do NOT lie to your customers by putting words in Ponderosa's mouth. You do NOT mock your customers on a PUBLIC forum, no matter whether you are on holiday or not. You do NOT have the right to be self-righteous on your mountain when it is your customers who pay the company that pays you. You are in a SERVICE industry - your customers deserve to be considered, to be respected, and not to be ridiculed. The way that LJ has allowed their staff to continue to lie, to mock and to judge LJ accounts when they are obviously biased is unprofessional, unethical and disrespectful to their customers.

The utter disrespect that LJ, a profit-making business, has shown their customers is truly appalling.

No, still not leaving because leaving means they win, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to be forced out of here.

Tags:

Comments

[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 9th, 2007 02:40 am (UTC)
I have to say that I honestly don't understand the idea that if one leaves LJ wins, because if LJ loses customers/content providers, isn't that pretty much the definition of losing?

LJ wants $$$-->they get this cash from people viewing ads and people paying for journals. In the wider picture, people buy journals and view ads because you and I are here, posting our content and being an audience they want to reach. LJ is only valuable because I am reading it and I am posting on it. If anyone on my flist has bought/viewed ads in order to see my journal, then my journal helps LJ make money, in other words. Even as a free user, when I view ads, I help LJ make money, in other words.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 12:34 am (UTC)
But by leaving it means that LJ will have the 'community' they want, getting rid of anyone they find to be against their sense of what’s right and what’s wrong. It is pretty obvious that the latest fiasco was aimed at HP explicit art, and I'm pretty sure LJ would be perfectly happy for ALL HP slash fans off their server. It is like they are making things difficult for a section of the community that can get them into legal hot waters but would be perfectly happy if every other fan who is interested for the 'sexual' aspect of fandom to leave as well. And I'm just feeling contrary enough to stay because I no one has the right to tell me what I can and can’t write/draw. Leaving means that they get their ‘community’ because all the people who does have issues with LJ’s TOS would have left, and new customers/users won't actually know what they are getting into (not that they'd care, but some might). And to me that means they win.
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 01:08 am (UTC)
? But what does that matter? If LJ really really really wanted to get rid of everyone who didn't agree with their sense of right and wrong, it would be trivial for them to explicitly state that all underage fiction is not okay too. If they were really serious, they could even revise the TOS and make us all sign a new one stating that we agreed never to post any fiction or art containing sexually explicit material. They could also easily just declare that fanfiction in general is against TOS.

It was aimed explictly against fanart depicting underage characters, which is not the same as HP slash. It seems to me, though, that they're trying (for whatever reason) not to make all fans interested in sexual material leave, otherwise they would make much harsher policies. So it seems to me that they don't think that it would be a winning prospect for all fans to leave. I mean, so in my reading of the situation, I think from their perspective, if the people who are not posting explicit HP fanart featuring underage characters stay, they win.

(Pure speculation: Actually, my reading seems to be that LJ people think the laws are BS, but they need to cover their ass and their lawyers told them things, so they are more interested in policies they can point to and say 'see, we are following the law' rather than actually trying to get rid of fandom. There is a group of people they're really gunning for, but they're not fans.)

BTW, isn't Australian law much harsher than U.S. law when it comes to this?
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 01:36 am (UTC)
I actually do agree with everything you are saying especially in relation to the way you are reading fans/users reaction to the law. I'm actually fine with the whole deletion of HP fanart and so forth; it is in LJ's rights. I'm even fine with their unclear policy, I am, however, not OK with the utter incompetence at which LJ is handling the issue. Staff members going out of their way disrespecting customer, and a lack of transparency in the LJ abuse team and the 6A/LJ's policies makes me very angry. Also, it is the inconsistencies in their policies that get to me. It is fine to have pro-anoerexia communities and it is OK to have KKK communities, but it is not OK to have HP fanart. The way I figure if they are going to alienate part of their customer base with PR BS, they really should have thought better of it.

Basically, the major issue for me here is that LJ screwed up and does NOT own up their mistakes. This whole thing could have been avoided if they had actually clarified their TOS, asked everyone to remove their fanart, and THEN deleted journals that did not abide by their rules, but no, they deleted and suspended journals at times when they thought fans were most unaware.

So, I suppose, for me, I'm not arguing the legality issues of what LJ did because as far as I'm concerned they have the right to do whatever because it is their server. However, at the same time they mocked, lied, and tried subterfuge to get things pass their customers.

Australian law versus US law, uh, in what sense? Also, I'm actually very unsure of Aust laws.

[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 02:04 am (UTC)
Yeah, I agree that the way they're handling it is rather bad, and they don't seem to be able to refrain from making basic mistakes like antagonizing customers needlessly. However, in that situation, that means that they really don't want you gone, and so the problem then is less free speech and 'they don't want me' and more 'LJ policies are inconsistent and their Public Relations are incompetent.' So, I still hold that LJ 'winning' is if they don't lose users through their bad PR. If people all stay, that actually means they haven't suffered any consequences, heh.

Seriously, I read a post by ex-LJ staff in which she said that she personally, considering the legal climate, would not have any art like that anywhere near her. If the LJ staff is that fearful of that kind of stuff, they should have told the userbase and that would have saved EVERYONE a lot of trouble. I think they just stay mum and don't clarify matters because they're afraid people will bolt. That's why they were previously bending backwards and going 'oh, we've never seen any fanfic that breaks the Miller Test.' So that's why I don't really believe they are trying to get rid of fans, because otherwise they wouldn't have tried all that reassuring stuff.

As for pro-ana, there haven't been any laws against it. When people start legislating, that'll be when LJ boots them. As for racial hate comms, that really makes me more angry than the pro-ana, but that has legal history behind it. Unless they threaten someone's life, it seems it's not illegal. Perhaps people can mount a campaign to get racial hate off of LJ, but it won't have anything to do with fandom.

Abuse has always lacked transparency, but it seems this is the first time a large group of people are challenging it.

Oh, don't you recall the Skyhawke archive controversy? On chan. It was all because someone was arrested for textual content in Australia, so they decided they had to form this council to vet everything for artistic merit.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 03:38 am (UTC)
I see your point. But for once I'm going for the "if we complain enough something will happen," I mean it works for all the other extremist groups *koffs* (tongue in cheek intended). It is just one of those points we are going to have to disagree on.

In regard to LJ ex-staff member - exactly. I can understand protecting oneself; it is the smart thing to do. Honestly speaking I think LJ is just trying to get rid of HP slash because HP is monolith of money and power, WB can squash LJ with very little thought.

See, when the whole LJ fiasco started up back in May I was kind of bemused by the whole thing. But now I'm just really stunned by LJ’s stupidity, and while it was about fandom, it honestly isn't anymore, at least not for me. I whole heartedly believe that LJ did the smart thing by removing content that could get them into hot water. However, I also know that LJ dropped the ball on the way they handled the whole situation. My objection to the whole kafuffle - the way LJ handled the situation and continual mishandling of it, and not the outcome (removal of content that could land them in deep sh*t). Having said that, events have reached the point that the way LJ did their business has seriously inflamed the situation.

If only they EXPLAINED themselves! If only the deleted journals got a WARNING, if only… either way LJ screwed themselves over royally.

Perhaps people can mount a campaign to get racial hate off of LJ, but it won't have anything to do with fandom.

I like that idea. Also, see above for my comment about me not taking this as a fandom thing so much as seeing it from a customer perspective. If I leave it won’t be for fandom, it will be because LJ truly failed on their corporate governance.

Abuse has always lacked transparency, but it seems this is the first time a large group of people are challenging it.

It always amazes me when corporate forgets that the Internet is the place where people do care. Things that people will forget/allow in RL are something that will send people online into a feeding frenzy. And yet, businesses continue to make the same mistakes over and over again.

Ah, the chan thing, I remember now. I honestly don’t know because pretty much missed that one completely. See what I mean about staying and TALKING about it always so that new people can be taught! ;p
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 04:01 am (UTC)
We'll just have to see what they do. I think the problem is less WB (WB has been told about it, I'm sure) than law enforcement. With WB, all LJ has to do is just follow DMCA procedures, and few fans will challenge those: in any event, with copyright law, LJ can just make it between the accused and the copyright holder, so they don't have to be involved.

Well, the former things with abuse haven't had a high profile; look at the back archives for [livejournal.com profile] abuse_lj_abuse, for example. Some of the complaints in there are BS, but some are more legitimate.

As for why I'm not leaving, it's because it's a cost-benefit analysis for me. I get some things out of LJ, and I am not overly inconvenienced by what LJ gets out of me. I think LJ does benefit a teeny weeny bit, just as it does from any active user, but I don't care. LJ management will either get its head screwed on or not, but with all of this, I'm not holding my breath.

Oh, but why would we need to stay on LJ to talk about the Skyhawke chan thing? It had nothing to do with LJ.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 05:57 am (UTC)
*Nods* What still gets me is why didn't they just makes s statement about the whole thing? I mean I would have understood them if they had told me - 'Due to the current political climate, to protect us and you, our customers, changes to our policy have/will be made..." Or something like it.

From what I've seen the legimate issues that have been ignored can come back and bite LJ on the arse.

I'm pretty much on the same boat as you, though I still want to talk about it because I honestly believe it ist the only way LJ will know how NOT to conduct business in the future. I can always hope.

Not Skyhawke so much as just things in general. It is sad, but I get most of my news from my flist or certain book marked sites.
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 06:31 am (UTC)
I have no idea. What I'm thinking is that a) they had no idea people would be upset (what? Didn't they learn anything from the last kerfluffle?) b) their lawyers advised them not to clarify or c) they feared scaring people, so hoped it would blow over.

Talk about it to whom? I was thinking of sending in something to LJ to tell them to put all of this stuff in the FAQ, but people have been telling them to clarify abuse policies for years. I don't know why LJ doesn't take the advice people give it. Their prerogative, but I'm not going to waste my breath if they show no signs of updating.

Yeah, well, it seems that textual stuff with minors that lacks artistic merit is of dubious legality in Australia, IIRC.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 06:51 am (UTC)
a) May was just over two months ago. *Sighs*.

I make comments once, and only once. Then I go and make more noise on my own LJ, or other people's LJ. I'm a lurker at heart. Also, LJ's actions has/have/ been rather dumb.

This doesn't actually surprise me much. Sex in relation to minors always an explosion waiting to happen. It actually surprises me when people don't protect themselves btter when producing fanfiction than can get them into trouble. Also, Australian law/government is becoming more and more conservative. Don't even get me started on the stupid laws the Federal governtment are trying to pass.
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 07:26 am (UTC)
Yeah, I have no idea why they seem to have learned nothing.

I wonder what they're going to do now? At this point, I'm not holding my breath for them to change, just more interested in seeing what new fireworks we'll see.

http://community.livejournal.com/free_speech_au/

Here's a comm which is supposed to have some legal information. There was supposedly a case, but I can't seem to find info on that because I don't know the name of the person.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 07:33 am (UTC)
They really need to employ someone who does nothing but PR. It isn't as if they don't have the money for it.

Whatever they do, or the users do, it is going to be really interesting.

Thanks for the link! Will check it up.
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 07:36 am (UTC)
Oh, but they do? See their org chart. It's just that the effectiveness of this PR does not seem to be very high.

It is. It will be interesting to see whether the comms go.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi279t.html

See also this link.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 08:32 am (UTC)
That is sad.

In relation to link - interesting. Well, at least they made it extremely clear. Also, what happens when it is written or produced by someone who is also underage? I remember being 16 or 17, and into anime and manga.
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 08:48 am (UTC)
I have no idea. In the U.S. I recall there was a case where an underage girl was charged for taking pictures of herself.
[identity profile] naanima.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 08:58 am (UTC)
... What?

Um, with prison? Fine?
[identity profile] worldserpent.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 10th, 2007 09:03 am (UTC)
I have no idea what happened in the end, I'm afraid.
elf: Rainbow sparkly fairy (Default)
[personal profile] elf wrote:
Aug. 12th, 2007 04:03 pm (UTC)
As for pro-ana, there haven't been any laws against it.

Sure there are. "Contributing to the delinquency of a minor" laws. Encouraging impressionable kids to hurt themselves is a crime.

There are no *specific* anti-pro-ana laws, but there are also no specific anti-slash-fic/art laws.
[identity profile] alchemia.livejournal.com wrote:
Aug. 12th, 2007 08:53 pm (UTC)
As for pro-ana, there haven't been any laws against it. When people start legislating, that'll be when LJ boots them.

Where's the law that says homoerotic art is illegal? its not.

pro-ana comms instuct people on how to starve themselves to death- to harm themselves. LJ's TOS prohibits postings to cause among other things harm. it doesn't matter if its legal or not, its against their TOS.

if LJ prohibitted catmacros in their TOS, that's their right as a private business, and has nothign to do with freespeech. and they turn a blind eye to catmacro sharing comms, especially if they then go after walrus macros, even though nothing was said about those in the TOS, then people are going to call them on it.

Profile

naanima: (Default)
[personal profile] naanima
witty, somehow

Latest Month

October 2009
S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
Designed by [personal profile] chasethestars