• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Livejournal

Swampwulf

Verbose Senior Bitch
Have any of you LiveJournalists out there been following the silliness going on over there recently?

http://community.livejournal.com/lj_biz/

I actually deleted my paid account and started up a GreatestJournal account
http://swampwulf.greatestjournal.com/
and was wondering if anyone else 'round here has one, or has considered it?

Doesn't seem to be as much furry content there, but if LJ keeps moving in the direction it is, then I figure it's only a matter of time.
(besides which I love the amount of icons/avatars/what ever they're called that GJ gives you instead of having to pay for them)
 

Swampwulf

Verbose Senior Bitch
blueroo said:
Following the law is silly?

Not at all!
Handling it the way they have so far however is.
It seems that users don't like vague explanations and being told that there is/will be some sort of vague system put in place, based off of a legal precedence that they can not quote but assure their users is quite real (according to their lawyers), to judge fiction standards tends to piss people off for some unfathomable reason.
 

DavidN

Member
I do have an LJ (its location is obvious from my username here). I'm not really bothered by that at all - mistakes were made, but I didn't know about the sheer enormity of the overdrama because of it.

I can't say I'm too drawn to GratestJournal's offer of however many icons, either. I have enough difficulty using six slots.
 

Xanthe

Member
I have an GJ account. xanthe_equine. Just in case something happens with LJ
 

blueroo

Member
Swampwulf said:
blueroo said:
Following the law is silly?

Not at all!
Handling it the way they have so far however is.
It seems that users don't like vague explanations and being told that there is/will be some sort of vague system put in place, based off of a legal precedence that they can not quote but assure their users is quite real (according to their lawyers), to judge fiction standards tends to piss people off for some unfathomable reason.

I didn't have any trouble understanding it.

"We only investigate things that are reported to us"
"We comply with all laws"
"Because some of the legal questions are grey, we err on the side of caution"

How does any of this affect you? Are you writing child porn or other grey legal area stories, or posting pictures of the same? If so, you should already be familiar with the laws related to what you're doing. If you aren't, and the system seems "vague" to you, you're just putting yourself in danger.
 

uncia

Member
blueroo said:
I didn't have any trouble understanding it.

Glad that's all totally clear to you, since it definitely was not to them.
=> http://news.livejournal.com/99159.html , http://news.livejournal.com/99515.html
 

Swampwulf

Verbose Senior Bitch
blueroo said:
Swampwulf said:
blueroo said:
Following the law is silly?

Not at all!
Handling it the way they have so far however is.
It seems that users don't like vague explanations and being told that there is/will be some sort of vague system put in place, based off of a legal precedence that they can not quote but assure their users is quite real (according to their lawyers), to judge fiction standards tends to piss people off for some unfathomable reason.

I didn't have any trouble understanding it.

"We only investigate things that are reported to us"
"We comply with all laws"
"Because some of the legal questions are grey, we err on the side of caution"

How does any of this affect you? Are you writing child porn or other grey legal area stories, or posting pictures of the same? If so, you should already be familiar with the laws related to what you're doing. If you aren't, and the system seems "vague" to you, you're just putting yourself in danger.

Why does your response on the other hand not surprise me at all?
I don't know what I did to offend or piss you off, but your tactic of trying to insinuate that I have/ am doing something illegal is really out of bounds.
I see in the Wiki for the site that I have absolutely no recourse to complain to any other member of the staff about your behavior so instead of offering alternatives to people with legitimate concerns I'll simply keep my muzzle shut.

Peace.
 

blueroo

Member
I'm not offended or pissed off. I don't know what would make you believe that. I'm not accusing you of performing illegal activities either. I don't understand how you would believe that either. This LJ policy we're talking about only applies to accounts that are posting content in the grey legal areas of the law. Content like kiddie porn stories.

My question was simply this. Why would you delete your LiveJournal because LJ is being strict with people who are operating in the grey (probably illegal) areas of the law? Are you one of those people? Are you protesting the action against them? I'm just curious about your motives.

I am not above the law here on FurAffinity. You can write to Dragoneer, Damaratus, Pinkuh, Wicht, WolfBlade, and any other admin and complain about me if you like. I can't stop you and I wouldn't even if I could.
 

uncia

Member
Blue, let me ask you two questions.

Are you in denial? Are you actually a child molester?

...

...

...

...


"I'm not accusing you of performing illegal activities either. I don't understand how you would believe that either."

For your information, merely changing a statement into a question does not remove the underlying "bad taste" in terms of possible implications. Especially when there is already material for any possible inferences to work on (e.g. Swampwulf's existing fiction, in this case).

Regardless of your actual intent, if you still cannot see how the manner in which you write could easily be "taken the wrong way" and lead to conflict and/or pissed-off community members, you have made pretty-much zero progress since last month or indeed since we talked about such matters before you were an admin. Not that I expected much, given the manner in which you were behaving then and have been generally ever since.

If it ain't obvious to you by now, de-personalise controversial topics.
You are not a rank-and-file member of the community who can bandy those around "on the level" with other community members.
e.g. "How does any of this affect you? Are you writing child porn or other grey legal area stories, or posting pictures of the same? If so, you should already be...." => "If someone on LJ was writing legal grey area content....".

If that still ain't clear to you, let me know.

aside: Does it cost anything to /ever/ say "sorry", even if that's merely a passing platitude, or apologise to any degree rather than taking things defensively from your /own/ p.o.v.? Please try reading your latest reply again in that context, too.

All the above 02c, anyhow...

Regards,
David.
 

KieferSkunk

New Member
uncia said:
Blue, let me ask you two questions.

Are you in denial? Are you actually a child molester?

Forgive me for stepping in, but don't you think you all might be overreacting a bit here? Some people are more direct and blunt in the way they ask questions, but that doesn't mean they're automatically targeting others in a harmful way. I know that if I'd been the one posting the original message, Blueroo would have most likely asked me the same exact question. And unlike those who responded, I would have simply replied "No" to his questions and left it at that. Since I know I am neither of the things he asked, there'd be no reason for me to be offended by his question. On the other hand, if he'd told me I *WAS* writing child porn or something like that, I would be offended and I would think your response to him would have been more appropriate.

I am not out-and-out defending Blueroo's actions - I do think he could have worded his responses a bit more tactfully. But I don't think overreacting to those responses is helping matters at all.

Just my two cents.

(Edited to indicate I was addressing everybody in this thread, not just Uncia.)
 

uncia

Member
KieferSkunk said:
Some people are more direct and blunt in the way they ask questions, but that doesn't mean they're automatically targeting others in a harmful way. I know that if I'd been the one posting the original message, Blueroo would have most likely asked me the same exact question. And unlike those who responded, I would have simply replied "No" to his questions and left it at that.

*nods in agreement*. Yup, I'm sure even the majority of community members would've reacted in that manner and let it roll off their backs.
*
The difference is that if you're an admin you're no longer "on the level", you have a considerable responsibility in terms of your potential impact on tens of thousands of people here and being unnecessarily blunt and careless in ones words on an ongoing basis will almost inevitably cause more grief in the long run than if a bit more tact & diplomacy was applied. That should be pretty obvious and not really require to be stated in public, of course...
Does that make more sense in context?

KieferSkunk said:
I am not out-and-out defending Blueroo's actions - I do think he could have worded his responses a bit more tactfully. But I don't think overreacting to those responses is helping matters at all.

Know what you mean and personally I'd rather there was no need to have to make such observations on any members of the admin team. (And there's certainly very little danger of ever /needing/ to do so to some, since they do have far more tact, diplomacy and ability to think from viewpoints other than their own).

How many people leaving or badwill created needlessly does it take, though, to be "overreacting" by making such observations when those can still be taken or left at will?
I also doubt things would automatically be any "better" by saying nothing and tacitly accepting that admins feeling totally free to go around being as brusque and tactless as they wish is "AOK".

KieferSkunk said:
Just my two cents.

And a pleasure to listen/discuss likewise in return.

Thanks,
David.
 

KieferSkunk

New Member
uncia said:
The difference is that if you're an admin you're no longer "on the level", you have a considerable responsibility in terms of your potential impact on tens of thousands of people here and being unnecessarily blunt and careless in ones words on an ongoing basis will almost inevitably cause more grief in the long run than if a bit more tact & diplomacy was applied. That should be pretty obvious and not really require to be stated in public, of course...
Does that make more sense in context?

It does somewhat. I've been in administratorship positions before, so I'm well aware of the extra responsibility involved.

I also know Blueroo personally, and I know that he has his rough edges - we're all trying to help him with that where and when possible (that's what friends are for!).

uncia said:
How many people leaving or badwill created needlessly does it take, though, to be "overreacting" by making such observations when those can still be taken or left at will?
I also doubt things would automatically be any "better" by saying nothing and tacitly accepting that admins feeling totally free to go around being as brusque and tactless as they wish is "AOK".

I don't really have much I can say to this. Someone in a position of power does need to be extra careful with what they say, since they not only represent themselves but the group/organization they "work" for.

What I really would like to see, though, is more maturity all around. FurAffinity has a (probably ill-deserved) reputation among the fandom as having attracted a lot of drama and quite a few people whose maturity levels are lower than standard. A lot of people who do the "take my ball and go home" thing when things aren't going their way. I'd like to see people with enough maturity in situations like this one to be able to not take brusque and direct comments like Blueroo's so personally. Just remember, folks, if it doesn't apply to you, you don't have to get mad about it.
 

uncia

Member
*nods strongly in agreement* Yep, that's an ill-deserved reputation, IMHO, given the number of people in the community.
All-told, things are fairly reasonable and drama free (especially when the server is running smoothly, as it has been most of the time these past 4-5 months :)) and neither would I encourage the admin mindset which thrives on the misconception that it's otherwise and deliberately seeks to play on that in order to hype, isolate and remove the immature/troublemakers beyond that which is absolutely necessary. Much better to keep things as calm as possible and the tact/diplomacy settings on "high"... People are people and we'd be hoping a helluva lot for everyone to act in a cold, calm "rational" manner and shrugs their shoulders at every possible slight, even when not intended, every minute they're on FA.
I do know in this particular case it wasn't just one instance, though, and there was a good deal of frustration built up over a long time.

KieferSkunk said:
Just remember, folks, if it doesn't apply to you, you don't have to get mad about it.
One to write out and stick to the monitor, perhaps? ^^
Yep; even if that doesn't reduce the issues to zero, keeping that in the mindset certainly helps a good bit.

=
Just a few further thoughts, anyhow...

Cheers,
d.
 

blueroo

Member
uncia said:
I do know in this particular case it wasn't just one instance, though, and there was a good deal of frustration built up over a long time.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that I have history with Swampwulf? My ADHD makes sure I have a shoddy memory, but I don't think it's *that* bad. I don't recall having any run-ins with him before.
 

KieferSkunk

New Member
blueroo said:
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that I have history with Swampwulf? My ADHD makes sure I have a shoddy memory, but I don't think it's *that* bad. I don't recall having any run-ins with him before.

It sounded to me more like a general thing, Blue. Do you want to chat about it in private at some point? I may be able to help here, but I don't think this should continue in a public context.
 

blueroo

Member
KieferSkunk said:
blueroo said:
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that I have history with Swampwulf? My ADHD makes sure I have a shoddy memory, but I don't think it's *that* bad. I don't recall having any run-ins with him before.

It sounded to me more like a general thing, Blue. Do you want to chat about it in private at some point? I may be able to help here, but I don't think this should continue in a public context.

I'm always open to talk. Hit me on IM.
 

uncia

Member
[typed during KieferSkunk's reply & agreed w/that and the PM approach (thanks). sending anyhow, fwiw/for ref. ...]

blueroo said:
uncia said:
I do know in this particular case it wasn't just one instance, though, and there was a good deal of frustration built up over a long time.
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you saying that I have history with Swampwulf? My ADHD makes sure I have a shoddy memory, but I don't think it's *that* bad. I don't recall having any run-ins with him before.
I don't recall him saying that, either, so I didn't use those words. Could check for you if you don't wish to drop him a note to get the full story from his p.o.v., though.

If I remember his journal correctly (link unavailable, now deleted), that was frustration at seeing tactless, non-diplomatic behaviors being displayed repeatedly even if not directly "targetted" at him and believing that that was symptomatic of the site administration as a whole (with a few exceptions, perhaps).
As I've mentioned before, the impact an individual admin has on a community is far more than just a 1-to-1 thing (just like you can ban a troublemaker who /really/ "deserves that", but still have to remember that dozens of people will be watching the way in which you do so) and as KieferSkunk pointed out, you not only represent yourself, but the entire organisation by your actions and behaviors.
Being aware of other peoples points-of-view is far bigger-picture than just a 1-to-1 thing although that /is/ a critically important facet of administration, of course.

k... Not meaning to sound preachy, but I guess that's kinda difficult, covering that much ground.

Thanks for asking for the request for clarification there, Blue.

d.
 

koutoni

Wanker
[size=medium]so people are getting their panties in a knot because they can't have their child porn on their LJ? pffft. too bad.

*doesn't move from her LJ*
[/size]
 

LimeyKat

luvs her sum fuzzy anime
koutoni said:
[size=medium]so people are getting their panties in a knot because they can't have their child porn on their LJ? pffft. too bad.

*doesn't move from her LJ*
[/size]

That is pretty much it. Ill-informed bandwagon behavior.. *shrug*
 
Top