Log in

No account? Create an account
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
1. LJ management makes changes in policy that affect the terms of service, but never seems to get around to actually updating the written TOS. This is arguably a breach of contract with paid members.

2. LJ has STILL not provided a clear and unequivocal definition of what constitutes objectionable content. the current 100-day plan simply pushes the delivery of that definition another three months to the right.

3. The LJ abuse process frankly sucks. Material which is clearly in violation of the TOS is allowed to remain posted to LJ, while material which is NOT violative of the TOS is removed and accounts are cancelled. The abuse process must be transparent, and must be based on standards that are unequivocal and clearly articulated. Abuse responses MUST be uniform across all operators on the abuse team. If two abuse team members can look at the same LJ entry and come to different conclusions as to whether it violates policy, then the standards are'nt written clearly enough.

I echo these concerns.

Further, I note that LJ's handling of things that started with the strikethrough mess is so messed up that it is on-going even now. Yet, since they asked, insanejournal took a different and much more direct approach even though it was an LJ and not an IJ mess. The person in charge said:

I am solely responsible for the sites content, design, administration, and ultimately decisions by our abuse team. I am proud to say that in the almost 6 year life of this site we have had to suspend fewer than a handful of journals, and we would like to keep it that way. Unless there is a DMCA violation or a court order to remove content, we will not delete journals. (Emphasis mine)

Simple. Direct. Effective.

Guess who got the money last time I spent any on a blogging service?

Yeah, I had a permanent account on IJ within a week of the first sniff of Strikethrough. Now I have two. The membership there has more than DOUBLED since May 30, and I'm not sure about right now but for a while at least the migration-to-IJ community/asylum was the biggest community on the site except for perhaps asylum_promo, and had over twice the membership of the two major friend-finding communities combined. That? means a hell of a lot of LJ's users found something very attractive about IJ.

Yes to this. W
ithin a couple weeks of joining IJ after Boldthrough I had a permanent account there.

I agree with thse sentiments. These are my biggest concerns, and I went permanent at IJ.

  • 1