Comments | abuse_lj_abuse: Moderator decision

darkanansi in abuse_lj_abuse

Moderator decision

Dec 28, 2005 01:58

The previous post was not intended for the discussion of the actions of lj_abuse, but as a snark of a single individual.
It has turned into a slanging match between that individual and his accused, also outside of the remit of this community.

The thread has therefore been pulled by the moderators.

If either party has grievance with lj_abuse or its actions, and ( Read more... )

Comments 15

_themaninblack_ December 28 2005, 02:01:06 UTC

My fault. I obviously underestimated the degree of obsession of this individual. I'm glad the thread was pulled and, frankly, I was about ready to do it myself.

_themaninblack_ December 28 2005, 23:18:00 UTC

s/obsession/annoyance/

bronzed December 28 2005, 02:26:08 UTC

That whole thing was bordering on creepy quite frankly.

gillen December 28 2005, 04:31:06 UTC

Hasn't lj_abuse added "having a grievance against lj_abuse" to the list of punishable TOS violations yet?

gillen December 28 2005, 23:16:48 UTC

Evidently so.

People here, members in good standing, have repeatedly attempted to set up feeds to my blog on WordPress. LJ Abuse keeps shutting them down, on the pretext that I'm somehow violating this nonsensical "cease and desist order" when some third party independently decides they want to read what I write.

Love,

恐ろしき大鏡石

darkanansi December 28 2005, 23:50:23 UTC

Evidently your comprehension abilities have been skewed by the stresses of these events, and you seem to have missed the part where I stated;

If either party has grievance with lj_abuse or its actions, and can successfully voice them without overstepping the ToS, or any restrictions, whether deemed valid or otherwise, placed upon them, they may do so by starting a new thread.

gillen December 29 2005, 00:13:09 UTC

No, no, not at all.

I didn't miss it.

I just ignored it. There's a difference. You really oughta rename this place to "abuse_those_abused_by_lj_abuse_some_more", since that seems to be much more what it's about (and that's not solely from my experience, but from looking through a number of the entries initiated by others here).

For all the pretensions you and your info page seem to hold, this community is nothing more than a outgrowth of LJ Drama, presumably created to turn up grist for their vapid little mill ("Oh, look! A child rapist! On LJ! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!")

Hey, I've learned that this is how the game is played here. Don't expect any reasonable response from LJ Abuse, and as long as you do stuff anonymously, all's fair.

Like I said, I'm a quick study.

Thread 5

reticule December 28 2005, 05:55:29 UTC

I am neither of the parties, and my opinion is, quite frankly: God, you're a fucking twit.

vitriol120 December 28 2005, 20:24:45 UTC

Seconded.

kingdomofsand December 28 2005, 10:37:11 UTC

this is the fourth post about this one suspension. has to be a record.

does anybody remember the url of the blog stonemirror set up on some other blogging service? he posted it in one of the currently-suspended entries, but i forgot where it was, and google can't find it for me.

kingdomofsand December 28 2005, 11:43:59 UTC

http://stonemirror.wordpress.com/

"We're Number One! All others are Number Two, or less!" kingdomofsand December 28 2005, 21:49:25 UTC

Wouldn't have been necessary if LJ Abus(iv)e hadn't blown away the first two postings about it with their bogosity about "violating the Cease and Desist" order...

They just don't like to be made to look like the random and dictatorial bunch of secret police-wannabes they've increasingly become.

kingdomofsand December 29 2005, 00:15:55 UTC

Hi, Chris!