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



I put the ram in the ram-a-lam-a-ding-dong ([info]telesilla) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2003-08-22 14:16:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Peeved

The wank that can't exactly be wanked
So several yahoo groups got shut down recently, among them HPchan, master_aprentice, obi_chan, slashypronovels, and probably some others.

From one of the mods of M_A:

In short, M_A was the victim of an anti-chan fan who reported several lists which allow chan to yahoogroups. One of those chan lists was owned by one of M_A's admins. Because yahoogroups deemed her list had violated their terms of service, they deleted not only her chan-allowed list, but all lists she owned. Technically, all three mods are considered co-owners of M_A, but yahoogroups only allows for one owner per list and it was mere chance that she was the admin listed as owner of M_A. Hence, M_A was deleted. So the long and short of it is that M_A was deleted by default, not as a direct result of allowing slash, chan, tentacles or Force-flying lube.

[Edit] So yeah it's wanky in that several mailing lists got TOS'd because Fan A didn't like Fan B's stance on chan (underaged slash) but I have no links or anything. Think of it as sort of a Reader's Digest Condensed Wank. Or something like that.


(Post a new comment)


[info]titti
2003-08-23 01:00 am UTC (link)
It's already old news. The HP ML have gone insane for the past 30+ hours. So bloody annoying. You want a recap, I put one without wanking in my journal.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]telesilla
2003-08-23 01:09 am UTC (link)
Oh yeah I've known about it, just hadn't gotten around to mentioning it here.

What makes it wank is that these groups were shut down simply because Fan A didn't approve or Fan B's interest in chan.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]titti
2003-08-23 01:17 am UTC (link)
I think it went beyond that since there has been bitching about that list for a while. You know I love HP and I write most of my fics in the fandom, I just try to avoid any and all discussion, though, because it never ends well and no one listens to reason any way.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pyratejenni
2003-08-23 01:21 am UTC (link)
YahooGroups has been doing a purge of many, many lists that in some way deal with sex. It may have been a case of a disgruntled fan, it may not have been.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:
[info]titti
2003-08-23 01:25 am UTC (link)
You know I'm on 70 lists and I've seen on the Master_Apprentice being deleted without the owner's consent.

Thing is, if yahoo gets a complaint, it's just easier to delete a group than investigate. It's cost effective and they are there to make money not to indulge us.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]pyratejenni
2003-08-23 01:40 am UTC (link)
Thing is, if yahoo gets a complaint, it's just easier to delete a group than investigate.

Yup. Wouldn't be surprised if that was their SOP. But YG was clearing out some of the swinger-type lists a couple weeks ago (I know because I got spam from a list owner urging me to join another email host-group). It'd be interesting to know if any other chan-lists got the boot.

It's cost effective and they are there to make money not to indulge us.

It's amazing how often people forget this. And forget to read the ToS.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:
[info]titti
2003-08-23 01:49 am UTC (link)
None in the HP fandom beside that one, and I'm sure if it happens we'll hear about it, in thousands of repetitive emails.

I had a discussion about the ToS, and I kept telling people, they can delete anything they want according to the ToS. The answer is they can't because it violates the Bill of Right. They can't understand the difference between the state and a private entity.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

I weep for the long lost civics class
[info]pyratejenni
2003-08-23 03:33 am UTC (link)
*rolls eyes* It reminds me of all the "Censorship!" screaming when FF.net banned NC-17 stories.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

I weep for the long lost civics class
[info]titti
2003-08-23 03:36 am UTC (link)
*groan* There was nothing else on the MLs for days when that happened. My view, if you're looking for good fics, why are you even on FF.net. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: I weep for the long lost civics class
[info]pyratejenni
2003-08-23 05:29 am UTC (link)
Eh, it's where I posted the chapters of my IZ story. I tend to avoid looking for fanfic there. Though I'm tempted to see if there's any Revolutionary Girl Utena Mary Sues for [info]marysues.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: I weep for the long lost civics class
[info]titti
2003-08-23 05:55 am UTC (link)
I was only referring to the HP stories, I don't know about the other fandoms. There are too many teenagers trying to write slash in HP and it's just not good.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]redpanda
2003-08-23 01:33 am UTC (link)
I'm confused. How is this wank? It's interesting, sure, but...where's the selflove? ;)

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]telesilla
2003-08-23 01:40 am UTC (link)
Well it's mostly wanky becuase Fan A got a bunch of lists TOS'd by yahoo because she didn't like Fan B's stand on chan (underaged slash).

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]texta
2003-08-23 04:18 pm UTC (link)
I think it's wanky because its "U R a mean old poopyhead and I'm gonna tell Daddy on you! Nyah, nyah!"

It might not be as bad as outing someone to their family or to their employer, but the principle's the same. Unable to win the argument, a person turns to a higher (and even more narrow minded) authority to shame or hurt the other person out of pure vindictiveness.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]gairid
2003-08-23 01:34 am UTC (link)
Chan?

'Splain, Lucy. What is it?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]redpanda
2003-08-23 01:35 am UTC (link)
http://www.subreality.com/glossary/terms.htm#C

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]gairid
2003-08-23 01:52 am UTC (link)
Thank you...and thanks for the link. I saw it somewhere else but I couldn't remember which thread it was in...bookmarked it this time so I don't have to show my ignorance again!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]oxydosic
2003-08-23 01:53 am UTC (link)
Nasty chan hater!

*Goes off to read a Dan/Rupert/Sean Biggerstaff fic again*

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]telesilla
2003-08-23 02:07 am UTC (link)
Uh if such a fic exists ... link please? Because ... well yeah.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]enkogneatoh
2003-08-23 06:52 am UTC (link)
[sarcasm]

Oh, yay! HOW I've missed the ToS wars!

[/sarcasm]

(Reply to this)


[info]rikoshi
2003-08-23 07:00 am UTC (link)
I wonder if the same tactic could be used to get Love's Secret Domain removed...

Or do 10-year-old fox-boys not count as underage, since in fox-years, they'd be, like, 60 or something?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]rann
2003-08-23 08:00 pm UTC (link)
Hey. Don't even think it. It's wanky, it's kinda dumb, but I still hang out there. o.-

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]rikoshi
2003-08-23 11:30 pm UTC (link)
Nah, I wouldn't actually try anything like that. I might get petty at times, but I'm not mean.

It just struck me as a logical extention of the entry at hand, is all.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re:
[info]rann
2003-08-24 03:11 am UTC (link)
It's been done before. Not to Love's Secret Domain, but quite often, furry groups get caught up in these occasional "purges", and it can oft be traced to some disgruntled former member.
Or, maybe not. Hard to say. But it always sets off a burst of paranoia and wankiness, especially if the group's not actually gone, just having the typical database troubles.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]lots42
2003-08-24 02:02 am UTC (link)
I don't get it. If the deleted lists violated TOS, they violated TOS

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]mpoetess
2003-08-24 10:13 am UTC (link)
I think it's in much the same vein as F_W getting TOS'd from LJ. It's not that *Yahoo* is doing anything that they're not allowed to do, so much that the groups were apparently TOS'ed because of a disgruntled fan 'tattling' to the PTB's instead of working out their differences fano-a-fano.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]iczer6
2003-08-24 11:13 pm UTC (link)
I'll add that while Yahoo! may simply be trying to cover it's ass I do think it's a bit stupid to flat out delete a group based on a single complaint.

I mean the least they could do is take a look and see if the issue is legit.


Icz

(Reply to this)(Parent)

  
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map