kyanited: (Default)
Just for the record, I'm siding with LJ and WFI.

Sure, LJ may have jumped the gun, but they admitted mistakes, and since they only suspended and not deleted the journals, the few truly "innocent" journals can be restored.

I wonder how many people jumped the bash-WFI-bandwagon without even reading their statement:

Apparently it was LJ's decision to extend the criteria/action.

But I also think people read and agreed to LJ's rules and regulations when they subscribed, plus LJ is no lawless space, everyone shold be aware of that, and should be aware that if they create profiles that potentially indicate illegal content or content that does not keep with the rules, they'll be picked up. Just like I may be picked up when I'm walking the street alone at night with a crowbar and a flashlight, even if I'm just coming from [perfectly legal] work.
[And I already have been picked up by the police just for walking along the highway with a hammer, a compass and a helmet in daylight. But I was aware what kind of impression I might give to some people and was neither surprised nor unprepared.]

People need to take some responsibility for their own actions, too, namely naming their journals, creating profiles, describing their communities. I don't think anyone is really 'innocent' here. (Except maybe the children whose nude pictures were posted in years-old LJ communities.)


kyanited: (Default)


Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags