Azure Jane Lunatic (azurelunatic) wrote,
Azure Jane Lunatic

  • Location:

T3h Dr4m4 P0lic3 want their tazer back.

In other news, manboobs are probably legal everywhere, even if they are not the average person's choice of decorative image.

It would be really nice if someone thought to change the LJ TOS a little. 6A is a California-based company. In the state of California, according to what I could find via Google and E2, someone who is breastfeeding has the right to breastfeed in any location where she and the baby have the legal right to be. Including in public. If one cares to streeeeeetch this out a little, couldn't that be interpreted to mean "in public online"?

I'm not getting as flamed-up about the issue as some people are, mostly because of these factors:

  • I know of/know/am friends with some of the people who have to deal with drama of this sort.

  • I refuse to devote my perfectly good spare time to providing more job-related aggravation for my friends.

  • LJ is huge. There is no way that all default userpics/etc. can be policed for potentially offensive content. There have got to be quite a few potentially objectionable per LJ standards by content (but unobjectionable by context) default userpics out there that are passing under the radar. Jackbooted Barrayaran secret police are not going to be stomping down your door without a tip-off from a hostile, offended, or peevish party.

  • I QA Monitor at work, so I have a good idea about Corporate Policies In Action, and how they work, and where they can go badly wrong.

  • Some of LJ's policies are outright st00pid when applied in a situation they were not designed to handle.

  • Some of LJ's policies are in political disagreement with Commonly Held Liberal Beliefs. This is going to annoy holders of said liberal beliefs, though people who think the opposite are going to be pretty pleased.

  • Some of LJ's policies are in political disagreement with Commonly Held Conservative Beliefs. This is going to please holders of opposite opinions, but will inevitably annoy people on the Commonly Held Conservative side of the debate.

  • A lot of LJ's policies, like no stalking people who don't want you to stalk them, are in political disagreement with Commonly Held Nutjob Beliefs, though no one seems to mind this but utter nutjobs.

  • LJ policy must be applied evenhandedly, lest Scary Politics develop in addition to goddamn trolls.

  • This means that people can wind up enforcing policies that they personally disagree with, or think are misapplied but they've been overruled.

  • Some goddamn trolls know how to skirt the edges of outright abuse closely enough to be damned annoying but not technically make it over the line. This is the same attitude of that bloody rules lawyer in your game, except you can kick him (or her!) out of your game any time you want because it's your game, not a public game. These people probably have heard more about this goddamn troll than you have, and they have had to spend more time cleaning up after/investigating. Believe me, the nanosecond a chronic troll-type steps a hair out of line, it is the positive pleasure of those who have got the power to zap the fuck out of him or her. Sadly, this is only done with LJ-related consequences, and cannot be extended to physical-world violence. Until the troll goes over the line, there's not much that can be done lest Scary Personal Politics ensue. (There are some people who I would not be working with if it were up to me, rather than Corporate Policy, to determine who still works in my workplace. But Corporate Policy applies, and some of the people who routinely piss me off are actually good workers according to Corporate Policy.)

  • You want policy changed, you appeal in the direction of the policy. You do not abuse those who are responsible for enforcing the policy. That just pisses them off and maybe violates policy on the way.

  • Viva boobage!


Comments for this post were disabled by the author