Share Next Entry
Carved logo
theljstaff wrote in lj_policy
Welcome to lj_policy!

We're glad you're here. This community will be used to gather your opinions about social and community policy.

We understand that there is a lot to absorb and process right now with the creation of LiveJournal, Inc. Since this is a transition for all of us, we want to initiate a dialogue with you, the users. We feel it is very important to hear your concerns before we release any changes to current policies, and we want to start this process right away.

As a starting point, we don't want to just guess what's important to you; we want to hear about it directly from you. Please take a moment to answer the questions below:

1) What is your greatest concern about LiveJournal's current policies?

2) Regarding your primary concern, are you aware of a site that handles that issue in a way that you like?

This is just a starting point to get your initial ideas. We know you have a lot more where these come from, and in the coming days and weeks we will make sure you have a chance to voice your opinions. We look forward to your comments.

  • 1
I wrote:

I would also hope for a bit more openness.

Yeah, I forgot to mention code commits which are marked "[int]" so they don't show up in changelog.

Sigh. I've just found out on the grape vine that LiveJournal is restricting interest searches. Not only was this not announced, but the code for the hook which does this appears to be in ljcomint (i.e., secret). That is, I can't find it in the public code repositories*.

Not only is it completely crackers; it's also seriously bugged. If this was Six Apart's "last hurrah", let's hope SUP reverses the decision PDQ.

* The code which calls the hook and emits the error message is public and was added in June 2007.

about that other reply

I was just giving you a hard time about this in cdaae's thread below.

I wanted to let you know that, although I was accusing you of talking out of your ass there (and the stuff you talk about in this comment is the reason I did so), I do agree with your suggestions in your own thread.

However, I think there are two ways to refine what you're saying about flagging: the thing "wrong" with it is that there is potential, as someone else says below (another reply, not to you) for massive cyberbullying with sockpuppets. Supposedly the abuse team has ways to deal with this, but of course, they aren't transparent enough for us to trust them, and 6A has not built up a legacy of trust with this userbase. The other thing, which you said but which I want to reiterate, is that there must be a MUCH clearer explication of the difference between adult concepts and content.

(In other words, I'm assuming that my various potty-mouthed icons are adult concepts, but there is an arbitrary split if someone supposedly can't see the word "fuck" written out when they're 13 years and 360 days old, but it's OK for them to see it ten days later. You know? I would assume that "adult concepts" would be the sexual abuse survivor communities and stuff like vaginapagina, and "adult content" would be stuff like vintage-sex. But it would be great to know for sure.)

  • 1

Log in