![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
novapsycheAfter two days and 500 journals purged, LJ finally posted a mea culpa.
However, I (and a lot of other people) are not satisfied, mainly due to this:
Actually, this text does not represent what was posted earlier this morning, which read much worse. But, basically, I'm going to break it down like this:
One of my interests on my info page is (was) "prostitution". Prostitution is illegal in most areas of the United States, but it is legal in Nevada. There are many different kinds of prostitution (streetwalking, call girls, brothels, etc.). I use the word "prostitution" to indicate that I am interested in the topic, not that I am advocating illegal activity.
Interests, as I've always understood them (and I've been here since 2001), are searchable keywords. They are links that help you find like users. Yes, I could list "legal brothels in Nevada" as an interest, but how many more people would I find talking about prostitution in general if I just listed "prostitution" and linked to it?
The same for marijuana. Medical marijuana is on the books in many states, and the Supreme Court has issued legal rulings on the matter. I link to these stories because I am interested in drug policy in the United States. By having "marijuana" as an interest, does that necessarily mean I'm advocating that everyone who sees that keyword light up? No. It is asinine to think otherwise.
Here is an open letter to LJ's CEO, which expresses many of the same concerns.
However, I (and a lot of other people) are not satisfied, mainly due to this:
There were a number of profiles that expressed “interest” in activities that most of us would agree put children at risk, notably pedophilia and child rape. Both in the instructions for profiles and in other places on the site we make it clear that interests listed should be evaluated within the context of “I like x”, “I’m in favor of x” or “I support x”. As many profiles are the only public part of a private journal and profiles serve partly as an advertisement for people of like interests, it is important that the content of a profile can be evaluated as if it stands alone. If your profile were to express interest in pedophilia with no other content that describes this interest as in helping survivors or protecting children from it we must read the profile as “I like or I support or I’m in favor of it.” For this reason we suspended profiles that meet this criteria.
Actually, this text does not represent what was posted earlier this morning, which read much worse. But, basically, I'm going to break it down like this:
One of my interests on my info page is (was) "prostitution". Prostitution is illegal in most areas of the United States, but it is legal in Nevada. There are many different kinds of prostitution (streetwalking, call girls, brothels, etc.). I use the word "prostitution" to indicate that I am interested in the topic, not that I am advocating illegal activity.
Interests, as I've always understood them (and I've been here since 2001), are searchable keywords. They are links that help you find like users. Yes, I could list "legal brothels in Nevada" as an interest, but how many more people would I find talking about prostitution in general if I just listed "prostitution" and linked to it?
The same for marijuana. Medical marijuana is on the books in many states, and the Supreme Court has issued legal rulings on the matter. I link to these stories because I am interested in drug policy in the United States. By having "marijuana" as an interest, does that necessarily mean I'm advocating that everyone who sees that keyword light up? No. It is asinine to think otherwise.
Here is an open letter to LJ's CEO, which expresses many of the same concerns.