Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



sarai ([info]sarai) wrote in [info]fandom_lounge,
@ 2007-08-11 21:26:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Because I wasn't sure if clairvoyantwank would accept this (there are very little lulz in this report, unfortuntely):

thevelvetsun has a petition post calling for the LJ team to permenantly suspect the proanorexia comm. Not surprisingly, a lot of people support it.

However, there's a lot of wank brewing in the comments to the separate discussion entry in which defenders of the comm snipe back and forth with people who support [info]thevelvetsun's cause.

And this post makes an argument against shutting down proanorexia.

So you can guess how the rest of the argument is going to turn out.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]velvetwhip
2007-08-11 04:36 pm UTC (link)
Why is this even happening? You'd think with the distress fandom feels over some of their own being deleted, they wouldn't be jumping on the bandwagon to delete anyone. I'm not pro-anorexia by any means, but I am pro-free speech.


Gabrielle

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]spikewriter
2007-08-11 04:47 pm UTC (link)
Unfortunately, a number of people think "free speech" means getting to shout about what they want to shout about, including shutting other people down because they don't approve of them. They don't seem to realize their attitude is often the same as the people who want to shut them down.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]velvetwhip
2007-08-11 04:51 pm UTC (link)
Well, count me out of that. Maybe it's how I was raised, but I've always seen free speech as meaning that everyone gets to speak their piece no matter how much I don't personally like what they have to say.


Gabrielle

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]keri
2007-08-11 05:01 pm UTC (link)
There was this cool post to [info]dark_christian yesterday, copying some blogs from Orcino, on the subject of free speech, freedom of religion, and Evangelists. Not to repeat myself, but it was really cool to read. Totally recommend checking it out: http://community.livejournal.com/dark_christian/920422.html

(Reply to this)(Parent)


purplefeen
2007-08-11 09:14 pm UTC (link)
That's not the way you were raised, that's the law. Any idiot should know that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


purplefeen
2007-08-11 09:10 pm UTC (link)
a number of people think "free speech" means getting to shout about what they want to shout about, including shutting other people down because they don't approve of them

The reason they have this belief is because that is EXACTLY what freedom of speech means; the right to say whatever you want for or against whomever you want. No matter what the reason. It doesn't have be a popular opinion, it doesn't even have to make sense. But freedom of speech means, by law, the right to shout about whatever you want to shout about. In future, please look up these tems before giving erroneous information about them.

6A/LJ's TOS have nothing to do with free speech, as they have repeated over and over again. They are a business and have the right to delete anything they don't like, whether its providing illegal content or not. What people seem to be doing (I have no part in it and don't care one way or the other) is making LJ stick to the letter of their TOS and that's a valid argument.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]esorlehcar
2007-08-12 01:28 am UTC (link)
The reason they have this belief is because that is EXACTLY what freedom of speech means; the right to say whatever you want for or against whomever you want. No matter what the reason.

Well, no, not really. All kinds of speech are illegal. It's illegal to yell fire in a crowded theatre. It's illegal to say you are going to kill the president. As mentioned elsewhere in this post, libel and slander are illegal, and that's just naming a few. The government does have very large restrictions on what speech it can and cannot control (though that seems be shrinking daily, with "free speech zones" and people being placed on no fly lists for attending peace marches and the like), but the right to say anything you want, not matter what? Not so much.

You seem generally confused here... you're clear that LJ's policies don't count as First Amendment violations (and kudos on that, you're far ahead much of the general population there), but you seem to have difficulty apply that knowledge practically. The law has nothing to do with this argument. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with this argument, unless 6A/LJ becomes a government entity.

[info]velvetwhip's claims about "free speech" have nothing to do with the "law" that "any idiot should know." LJ is not subject to the First Amendment. The individual people calling for pro-anorexia communities to be removed from LJ in accordance with LJ's terms of service are not subject to the First Amendment. Attempting to conflate the two things is just silly.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 01:45 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 01:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]esorlehcar, 2007-08-12 02:00 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 02:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]esorlehcar, 2007-08-12 02:27 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 02:34 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]esorlehcar, 2007-08-12 02:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sorchar, 2007-08-12 04:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2007-08-12 04:52 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sisterelwood, 2007-08-12 10:54 pm UTC

[info]airawyn
2007-08-11 05:17 pm UTC (link)
Giving people (especially minors) step-by-step instructions on how to kill themselves is not generally covered under free speech.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]velvetwhip
2007-08-11 05:28 pm UTC (link)
Actually, there's a book called Final Exit which does just that and can be checked out at many libraries and purchased on Amazon. In fact, when it first came out, nearly every teenager I knew bought a copy...


Gabrielle

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]airawyn
2007-08-11 05:35 pm UTC (link)
Does it have a chapter that expressly encourages teen suicide and gives pointers for kids who are having trouble going through with it?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]velvetwhip, 2007-08-11 05:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]airawyn, 2007-08-11 05:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]velvetwhip, 2007-08-11 06:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]alexia75, 2007-08-11 06:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]telophase, 2007-08-11 08:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 09:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]airawyn, 2007-08-11 09:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 09:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]airawyn, 2007-08-11 10:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 06:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 09:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 09:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 09:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 09:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 10:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]worstangel, 2007-08-12 12:56 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 12:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snacky, 2007-08-12 12:00 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 12:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snacky, 2007-08-12 12:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mister_terrific, 2007-08-12 02:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snacky, 2007-08-12 02:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mister_terrific, 2007-08-12 03:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]seiberwing, 2007-08-12 04:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kamiki_seto, 2007-08-12 02:47 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mister_terrific, 2007-08-12 03:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kamiki_seto, 2007-08-12 03:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mister_terrific, 2007-08-12 03:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2007-08-12 01:45 pm UTC
Sep, I am so sorry for cassieclairing you here, but it must be done. - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:58 pm UTC
Re: Sep, I am so sorry for cassieclairing you here, but it must be done. - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:03 pm UTC
Re: Sep, I am so sorry for cassieclairing you here, but it must be done. - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 10:03 pm UTC
Re: Sep, I am so sorry for cassieclairing you here, but it must be done. - [info]sepiamagpie, 2007-08-12 05:27 am UTC
Re: Sep, I am so sorry for cassieclairing you here, but it must be done. - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 05:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]doomsday, 2007-08-11 10:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]doomsday, 2007-08-11 10:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]missdaisy, 2007-08-11 10:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]missdaisy, 2007-08-11 10:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2007-08-12 04:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 10:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 10:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]doomsday, 2007-08-11 10:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sashenka, 2007-08-11 10:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tehrin, 2007-08-11 11:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rotten_fish, 2007-08-12 01:14 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 01:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2007-08-12 05:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tehrin, 2007-08-11 11:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tehrin, 2007-08-11 11:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]souris, 2007-08-11 11:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 12:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]souris, 2007-08-12 12:21 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 12:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 01:57 am UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-12 02:10 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]panthea, 2007-08-12 03:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jar, 2007-08-12 08:48 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2007-08-12 01:44 pm UTC

purplefeen
2007-08-11 10:18 pm UTC (link)
Yes it is. 'Freedom of speech' means, legally, exactly what it implies: that you are allowed to say anything you like, no matter how hateful or disturbing. That's why someone saying they want to kill someone else is not against the law. It's only illegal when you start carrying out the plan or you pay or extort someone to do it for you. The action is illegal, the speech isn't. You can say you're going to do anything you want, but the law can't do anything about it until you take action.

6A/LJ's TOS have nothing to do with freedom of speech, as they've said over and over again. It's their terms that you have to agree to in order to do business with them. It's a business, they can make any rules they want to there; after all, you're not forced to do business with them if you don't like their policies.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]airawyn
2007-08-11 10:20 pm UTC (link)
What law school did you go to?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 10:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]airawyn, 2007-08-11 10:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]limyaael, 2007-08-11 10:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sashenka, 2007-08-11 11:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]omega, 2007-08-12 08:20 am UTC

[info]tehrin
2007-08-11 11:36 pm UTC (link)
You're forget defamation (libel and slander) and obsenity legislation. All of which are prosecutable and deal with the First Ammendment.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tehrin, 2007-08-11 11:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - purplefeen, 2007-08-11 11:48 pm UTC

[info]sepiamagpie
2007-08-11 06:10 pm UTC (link)
Quick question. Did you used to have a different username here or are you a whole new person for me to dislike?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]jrs1980
2007-08-11 06:22 pm UTC (link)
User ID sez they're shiny and new.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 07:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jrs1980, 2007-08-11 11:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:59 pm UTC

[info]lavenderfrost
2007-08-11 07:07 pm UTC (link)
My problem comes from a lack of consistency.

I've never really advocated deleting these comms in the past, but if HP erotica is leading to suspensions because it's seen as harmful, then pro-ana groups should certainly get the same treatment. Pro-ana, as opposed to a Snape/Harry pic, genuinely *is* harmful.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]velvetwhip
2007-08-11 07:14 pm UTC (link)
I understand that point of view, I really do. I just feel that a community under attack might want to rethink leading the charge against someone else.


Gabrielle

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]lavenderfrost, 2007-08-11 07:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 07:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]telophase, 2007-08-11 08:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 08:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]telophase, 2007-08-11 08:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]edelweiss, 2007-08-12 02:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]telophase, 2007-08-12 02:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 03:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2007-08-11 09:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 10:00 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]missdaisy, 2007-08-11 10:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]doomsday, 2007-08-11 09:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 10:00 pm UTC
This is not fandom_love - [info]tofuknight, 2007-08-12 12:11 am UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-12 12:12 am UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]tofuknight, 2007-08-12 12:22 am UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 12:35 am UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]tofuknight, 2007-08-12 12:38 am UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]rekall, 2007-08-12 04:58 pm UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]puipui, 2007-08-12 09:40 pm UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]crickets, 2007-08-12 10:32 pm UTC
Re: This is not fandom_love - [info]tehrin, 2007-08-13 01:41 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - pishbadlarr, 2007-08-11 10:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 10:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2007-08-12 12:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-12 12:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2007-08-12 12:36 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]damnedfallacy, 2007-08-11 10:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]missdaisy, 2007-08-11 10:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 11:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]scarah2, 2007-08-12 12:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rekall, 2007-08-11 09:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2007-08-12 01:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 09:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 10:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shannon730, 2007-08-11 10:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mistal, 2007-08-11 11:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]esclaramonde, 2007-08-12 01:53 pm UTC
Repost, because I suck at typing D: - [info]sheep, 2007-08-11 09:29 pm UTC
Re: Repost, because I suck at typing D: - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 09:38 pm UTC
Re: Repost, because I suck at typing D: - [info]sheep, 2007-08-11 09:40 pm UTC
Re: Repost, because I suck at typing D: - [info]tez, 2007-08-11 09:40 pm UTC
Re: Repost, because I suck at typing D: - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 10:07 pm UTC

[info]puipui
2007-08-11 07:23 pm UTC (link)
Yes. And the more that people point out that LJ isn't deleting those other people over there, the more it becomes obvious that LJ is only deleting things they find squicky and silly and embarrassing, and then making up excuses afterwards.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


purplefeen
2007-08-11 09:33 pm UTC (link)
That's the best argument in favour of this that I've heard yet.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]esorlehcar
2007-08-11 07:14 pm UTC (link)
You do understand that the concept of "free speech" has nothing to do with livejournal, as a private corporate entity, right? And that LJ's TOS has makes quite a lot of restrictions on speech?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]tehrin
2007-08-11 07:31 pm UTC (link)
OH SNAP.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]erinya
2007-08-11 09:10 pm UTC (link)
Not a lot of people do understand that, I'm afraid.

But yes, the Constitution does not apply to corporations, only to the US government.

LJ in fact has a right to restrict speech. So in fact this whole issue isn't about our "rights" at all, except for our right to take our business elsewhere when a company's customer service and policy is for crap.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]esorlehcar, 2007-08-11 09:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]erinya, 2007-08-11 09:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2007-08-11 10:02 pm UTC

[info]limyaael
2007-08-11 09:28 pm UTC (link)
Given that a lot of fandom has gotten laughed at for invoking free speech at all, it's nice that you now accuse fans of being against free speech in order to muddy the waters some more. Long live drama.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]lil_miss_stfu
2007-08-11 11:10 pm UTC (link)
Private servers =/= right to free speech.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]queencallipygos
2007-08-13 04:24 pm UTC (link)
Except that since 6A is a privately-owned business, they can set any kind of restrictions they want on whatever is or is not appropriate for its members. I'm pro free-speech too, but I also understand that this isn't a legal violation of the 1st Amendment.

....Insert signature here

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map