May. 31st, 2007

skysha_tranqui: (L Spoon --> pic from yuexu)
I think I just used dodgy milk for my tea. :/

I got Steph to sniff-test it & she said it was fine, but I'm still a bit unsure - wish I could tell if milk is off or not...*sigh*

I still can't believe [ profile] pornish_pixies is gone. That was such a good comm for HP slash - and one of the only ones I've come across that actually has a mix of good quality fem-fem & ma-ma! *mourns*

This sucks though, I had to actually edit my interests page & the comms that I'm a member of - purely on the off-chance that any of those hit the "hot buttons" that are being targeted.

Tbh given how general this attack on fandom actually is - as in, any comm containing a "hot button" in their interests runs the risk of being reported to LJ, who will then suspend/delete the account without doing a check of their own as to the validity of the claims - I'm beginning to worry that they might start targeting LJ users who were/are members of those comms.

I only took a really brief look at the actual site last night; was a bit mentally-tired, both from my long day & also from the 'intellectual' reading I'd already done on the posts about this problem. Still, just from the front page it sounded like they were bigoted vigilantes.

I mean, in one of the posts I linked to y*day, in the email from a member of the WFI, they acknowledged that they'd only heard of LJ recently & weren't themselves a member of the cyber community in that way.

So from that we already know they won't have any understanding of how things work here - they won't know the LJ-slang/fandom-slang, and I very much doubt that they'll be able to distinguish from a pedophile & someone who is just stretching their writer's muscles.

On their web page the WFI as much say so - responding to the barrage of emails/comments/complaints from LJers that they are "...striving to ensure that their* attempts to legitimize their sick ideas are not ignored by those that host them..."
(*By "their" I believe the WFI are referring to the comms/users who are being caught in their 'pedophile sweep')

This tells me they don't make any distinction between those who are actual sexual predators, and those who - as so many people are saying right now - are merely writing about sexual predators. [ profile] darkhavens told me about a comm focusing on the novel Lolita, which got deleted, despite the fact that it was in essence an intellectual semi-bookclub comm, and not a pit of sexual depravity and perversion.

Instead of taking these complaints into account, the WFI are saying that we're all missing the point - and from the looks of things their point is that the people whose accounts/comms are being deleted are sexual predators, and that their claims to be otherwise are merely their attempts to "legitimize" (and I guess in theory, mask) their own depravity.

To me this smacks of horse-blinkers (my fav saying where my dad is concerned, with his [actually pretty mild] homophobia & racism - which generally only goes so far as taking the piss out of them & not to the extent of bashing or even being verbally rude to them!).

I'm also uncomfortable with the fact that there are only 3 names on the site, of people involved in the WFI - as this doesn't imply a large, well-organised body of people. Also the fact that they say they "pass on" their information to law enforcement (the specific body of which they are unable to name, at that body's request).

To me this says they aren't doing it at the request of law enforcement, or that passing information on to law enforcement is even their key goal. Instead they merely do it in an off-hand, 'oh-now-we're-legitimate' kind of way. This also suggests they report comms/users before they tell law enforcement, so that the comms etc are suspended prior to any kind of in-depth investigation by an official, and experienced team of people.

I can kind of understand LJ's reaction of simply suspending the accounts - better safe than sorry in their position - but I still wish they'd do some kind of checking to see if the accusations are valid or not. :s


skysha_tranqui: (Default)

April 2008

   1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 91011 12
13 14 1516 171819
2021 22 23 242526
27 28 2930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 18th, 2017 11:04 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios