Guerilla action

[unixronin]

Don't like 6Apart's new censorship system?  Think it's another ill-conceived attempt by 6Apart to jump the shark?

Flag it as offensive.  (I did.)  It's not our jobs to be the surrogate parents of every teenager with a LiveJournal account.

Hey, 6Apart?¹  Get a life and a clue.

[1]  ObBitminesMeme:  YOU SUCK!

Comments

[mazianni.livejournal.com]

<aol>me too</aol>

[arasirsul.livejournal.com]

I don't get it.

1) The widget is designed so _you_ can flag _your own content_ if you believe it shouldn't be seen by people under 18.

2) The flag does nothing if the software thinks you're over 18 (and it's not like the software checked a drivers' license or anything)

3) They implemented a "hey don't sue us!" function so other people can flag content so someone at 6Apart can set the flag, which still doesn't do anything if you didn't tell the software you were under 18. It's not like it's putting up a pop-up on every webpage saying, "Hey, be our nanny for us!"

Or was I not actually supposed to read the thing, just get all indignant and yell about "censorship?"

As a side note: Companies don't censor; governments censor. Companies decide what they think is appropriate use of the equipment they bought and paid for. One of the big differences being when it's a company, you can choose a different one...

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Um, no. It allows you to mark your entire journal as containing ill-defined "adult concepts" or "adult content", and allows other people to flag (and report) your posts and comments as offensive or otherwise "inappropriate". The subsequent action from Six Apart will doubtless be as opaque and arbitrary as their handling of all other abuse/complaint/dispute issues has been. The potential for abuse of this "feature" should be obvious at a glance. I confidently predict that the new LJ trolling will be to go randomly marking entries as offensive.

[arasirsul.livejournal.com]

I still don't get it. I already could report your journal, I just had to use email. If I click "flag", nothing changes about who gets to read your journal. If a bunch of people flag your journal, then they go look at it. Kinda like if a bunch of people emailed them.

Basically, they've added a widget so you can flag your own content (and why the heck should they have to define if you should feel like your content is adult?), and made it so that you click a link rather than send email to invoke the opaque and arbitrary policies they already had, which is, admittedly, not a bright idea because it means their "Abuse Team" will be subject to abuse of the new widget.

Basically, though, the real problem you seem to have, the opaque and arbitrary policies, aren't anything new. If they're so bad, what are you still doing here?

[anda.livejournal.com]

Because, if enough people report it, and their Abuse Team goes to look at it, the Abuse Team can force your post to be marked as Explicit Content (which is the "NC-17" level).

Things that aren't being mentioned by people, but I know because I read the comments:

You can only flag 5 items in any 24-hour period.
Only accounts active longer than 1 month can flag items.
If someone seems to be abusing the flag, the Abuse folks can set their flags to "don't count, ignore".

Other than that, I completely agree with you.

What I don't get is why anyone thinks that flagging their post about the Flagging Stuff as "offensive" will actually do anything. It's petty childishness, as far as I can tell.

[beckyzoole.livejournal.com]

Word.

You can mark your own individual posts too, not just your entire journal. I just tried it, it works.

I see it as a way to save time for the APT. The asshats who will flag a post would have sent a complaint to Abuse before now, which Abuse would have had to spend time dealing with. Now, it takes five asshats flags until the complaint goes through to Abuse.

CYA for users, CYA for LJ, better all around.

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

Furthermore, we can't. Any kid can lie and claim they're over 14 or 18 or whatever. Without strong authentication, barrier systems like this and the one found on every other system are a complete joke.

"Would you like to see the naughty stuff? Just click yes, below!"

It's like DRM for people, except people aren't as programmable as computers.

[anda.livejournal.com]

Sure. But it makes it less plausible for kids to later say "oh, I just happened on it, I didn't mean to look!" ... "funny, you had to stop and put in a birthdate on a page that said that this was explicit."

[anda.livejournal.com]

I meant to also say "... from a legal standpoint". This is about lawyers and negligent parents.

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

So...it's our job to make it easier for parents to blame their kids for things?

[perspicuity.livejournal.com]

i was under the impression that LJ had a lower age limit to allow journal use at all. many sites require this in their legal. now, enforcing it harder. still. did that change? are they now opening up LJ to happy fun time so people can have journals for their monkeys and cats and fish and children and wildebeasts and fruitbats? great.

my journal is what it is. i paid for it. they host it. the content is mine. it's locked too to prevent any random person from trolling, copying, stealing, stalking, or being offended. i don't need their new toy.

#

[anda.livejournal.com]

Then don't use it. I don't plan to.

I do have some small amount of text which contains adult content (not even "explicit adult content", but the lower "topics which may be inappropriate for those under 14" level). It's locked up like mad, more than 'friends', less than 'private'.

Just because you don't need it doesn't mean that they don't.

Don't mistake me though - I'm -not- saying that this is the greatest thing since ethernet. It ain't.

[perspicuity.livejournal.com]

their lawyers need it. that's pretty clear.

#

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Far too much, these days, is ultimately all about the lawyers.

"Hey! This wood chipper doesn't have a warning against sticking your foot in it while it's running, but when I did that, it chewed my FOOT off!"
"Uh .... NO SHIT, SHERLOCK? What'd you go and do a stupid thing like that for anyway?"
"Well, it didn't say I shouldn't...."

[ilcylic.livejournal.com]

Done.

[yndy.livejournal.com]

Okay, sorry, but after reading it thoroughly, I disagree that it's a censorship issue.

It's simply a widget that allows you to restrict your own content, and also allows users to do the same thing they've always been able to do (report content to LJ Abuse for investigation) if they think it is either adult-content or against the TOS.

I think they've done a fairly good job addressing the potential abuses by limiting the number of flags, who can flag (based on length) and the ability to keep a specific individual from becoming "the content police."

Can't say as I see anything wrong with that.

[skellington.livejournal.com]

The problem with this is the same with any other "flag adult content" system.

If everyone doesn't use it, it is useless. Since most people won't use it, the majority of the adult content WILL show up everywhere. Therefore, at some point, it will become compulsory if it is to be at all useful.

Next, they'll argue that YOU become liable if you DON'T flag something that offends the little rug rats in Utah.

"Flag things safe for the rug rats" is slightly better, but then limits almost-adults to the ultra-sanitized playground for the 8 year olds.

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

I'm not thrilled about it either, but I just plan to not use it.

The thing that really burned my grits is that Safe Search Filtering is set to Moderate by default. I don't need a nanny. If I've been out on teh Intarwebs as long as I have (since 1994, iirc), then I can handle seeing the odd naked body part.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

And see handling the odd naked body part? :)

(or even, for that matter)

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

*ahem*

Don't make me flag this entry for smut! ;)