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



J. Crew Guy ([info]j_crew_guy) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2007-08-07 21:01:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:lj

This won't end well.
LJ FINALLY speaks.

It's already got a troll in writerspleasure, calling all the people posting serious questions/comments "whiners" and four(!) pages of comments so far.

Highlights in the post include a fauxpology for burr86's wanky comments, LJ still doesn't understand that Federal law doesn't cover depictions of fictional children in sexual situations and a lot of re-stating what they've said before.

Edit: Well, this is an interesting revelation. Actually, there are several members of various fandom communities involved on the review board, as well as the Abuse Prevention Team itself.

And this list of official statements made by LJ staff in the "clarification" lj_biz post should bear watching.

Edit 2: coffeechica is talking with LJ users in stupid_free here. Odds on how long before it gets deleted? Anyone? Anyone? ...Bueller?

...and LJ/6A employees can't even come up with their own boilerplate responses, because rachel (she of the icon where she's posing with a big glass of beer) plagarized a LJ user's comment to use as her own.

Oh, and the lj_biz post has maxed out at 5000 comments in about sixteen hours, which is a new record, I believe. People are going back to the previous lj_biz post to leave comments there, I think.

Edit 3: Godwin's was reached on page 17 of the lj_biz post. (Thanks to [info]khym_chanur for the link.)

The current lj_biz post has made cNet.

The whole thing has been covered by German news magazine Der Spiegel. And a translation. (Thanks to [info]airborne_rodent for those links.)

Slashdot covers it, too. As does Digg. (Thanks to [info]utahraptor for the Digg link.)

Edit 4: Our own [info]cat_mcdougall wrote up a semi-editorial article here. As she says, the "Fandome" is them editing my article.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]ravenscanary
2007-08-08 03:46 am UTC (link)
Wow, what a great time to post pictures of collapsed bridges in a FAIL macro.

Someone was thinking "classy" today.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]jira
2007-08-08 03:52 am UTC (link)
Oh man, I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]meammouse
2007-08-08 03:57 am UTC (link)
Hmmm, looks like a legitimate mistake on her part. They worked it out in the comments.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ravenscanary
2007-08-08 04:08 am UTC (link)
I still think it's *facepalm*-worthy ridiculous.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]agent_hyatt
2007-08-08 04:03 am UTC (link)
According to her, it's not the Minneapolis bridge, and from what I've seen of the pictures, I'd agree. Pretty sure an interstate bridge wouldn't have a building on it...

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]ravenscanary
2007-08-08 04:07 am UTC (link)
It's obviously not the Minneapolis bridge, yes, but still...come *on*.

Posting pictures of a collapsed skyscraper a few days after 9/11, even if it was clearly not the WTC, would demonstrate an eyebrow-raising lack of awareness, sensitivity, or both.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]agent_hyatt
2007-08-08 04:10 am UTC (link)
It could be worse. Could've been about a mine collapse. At least the bridge collapse was last week.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


dracothelizard
2007-08-08 03:21 pm UTC (link)
Well, 9/11 pretty much became international news in the same instant. The collapsed Minneapolis bridge is not. While it is in poor taste to post a collapsed bridge close when a real bridge has collapsed a few days before, you can't expect non-Americans to be aware of it, as it hasn't exactly been covered outside of the country.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map