Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Grrr, censorship.

I think this site probably explains it best:


This is very aggrevating to me, because if everyone gets rid of their 'interests' it severely limits the networking ability of Livejournal. I do agree that Livejournal does need to take a stronger stance on pedophilia complaints, but this is going far too far.

(I can't help but curse LJ going 'corporate' with Six Apart, it seems like everything's gotten worse.)


( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 30th, 2007 04:30 am (UTC)
haha I'm game for that.

Going to get off my ass and archive my LJ when I get home... which I should be doing regularly anyway I guess ^^;;;
May. 30th, 2007 05:02 am (UTC)
I don't think that's what is entirely causing people to get booted. The interest makes you easier to target but you should only be getting booted if you have public posts with material of that nature since that is in blatant violation of LJ's TOS (which no one of course reads but saves LJ's ass from being sued) and that's what the warriors for innocence are going after from what I understand. If your posts are private/friends only LJ can't do shit to ban you even if you have interests like "pedophilia" "incest" etc. If that were the case they'd also have to go after people who listed illegal things like illicit drugs, murder, etc.
May. 30th, 2007 05:13 am (UTC)
What part of the TOS does it violate?
May. 30th, 2007 05:20 am (UTC)
A few areas...


Section XIV - Journal content, Section XVI - Member Conduct (in particular #1 and #13 and #15 with encouragement of community postings)
May. 30th, 2007 05:53 am (UTC)
Wow...guess I hadn't read these as thoroughly as I thought since the switchover.

"Upload, post or otherwise transmit any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive to another's privacy (up to, but not excluding any address, email, phone number, or any other contact information without the written consent of the owner of such information), hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;"

This seems to be forbidding about 60% or more of stuff posted. I mean, obscene? By what definition? Merriam-Webster says "a : abhorrent to morality or virtue; specifically : designed to incite to lust or depravity b : containing or being language regarded as taboo in polite usage c : repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles d : so excessive as to be offensive ". I may as well trash my journal now, then, along with a majority of other posters. And don't even get me started on the absurdity of "otherwise objectionable". Oy.

May. 30th, 2007 05:59 am (UTC)
Most of that is the same though from before the switch. The "obscene" part has always been there as that's the general cover term for dealing with standards for what is considered pornography, at least in the US. And seeing as how in most areas sexually explicit material is supposed to be limited to those over 18 or 21 (depending on the area) and LJ has no locks/protections for verifying age, anything that is posted publicly can easily be reported as being "obscene" or "objectionable" if it's not all-ages appropriate. =/
May. 30th, 2007 06:08 am (UTC)
So I can't say fuck? That's obscene. And there are a lot of posts on LJ that are quite public about religion that I find "repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles". Maybe I should go report them...

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )