This whole journal thing.
I've avoided this topic because I know I'm in the minority in my opinion, but that's never been a good reason to stay silent, has it?
I simply don't see 6A/LJ as the bad guy of "Strikethrough 2007" and its accompanying fallout. Did they behave perfectly? Well, no. But I don't know any company that would, given the pressures they were put under. I don't see them as being in bed with some minority faction; I see them struggling to make sure they remain solvent in a sue-happy society with very very indistinct laws about free speech when it comes to all things sexual.
Since it's my opinion that outside pressure is the cause of recent events, I don't think moving to other journaling systems is the solution. All the interest in InsaneJournal caused me to go have a look at their TOC. Well, they don't allow anything "vulgar" or "obscene" and tell you not to "impersonate any person or entity" (ought to make RP interesting) or "promote or provide instructional information about illegal activities." In other words, their TOC is pretty standard, with the usual vague spots.
So my theory is that it will go pretty much like this: if mass exodus from LJ occurs to another platform such as IJ, ultimately the public profile of controversial journals will increase there and become subject to conservative criticism. Assuming the platform wants to cover its ass (perfectly reasonable), it will then attempt some sort of ill-defined "crackdown" in hopes of making the critics happy without completely alienating those who are controversial in their journals. (What else would you have them do? Ignore the possibility of getting their asses sued, or sharply curtailing any journaling activity that is remotely objectionable?) And people will abandon ship and move on to whatever new platform has come up that hasn't yet realized this is inevitable, and the whole cycle starts over again.
This is just my take based on what I've seen thus far. Future events may well prove me wrong, but this is where I stand right now, and it's pretty much where I've stood since this started.
You can't expect a journaling platform to be perfect in its policies about controversial material when it exists within a society filled with confusion, double standards, and litigious conundrums on the topic.
I simply don't see 6A/LJ as the bad guy of "Strikethrough 2007" and its accompanying fallout. Did they behave perfectly? Well, no. But I don't know any company that would, given the pressures they were put under. I don't see them as being in bed with some minority faction; I see them struggling to make sure they remain solvent in a sue-happy society with very very indistinct laws about free speech when it comes to all things sexual.
Since it's my opinion that outside pressure is the cause of recent events, I don't think moving to other journaling systems is the solution. All the interest in InsaneJournal caused me to go have a look at their TOC. Well, they don't allow anything "vulgar" or "obscene" and tell you not to "impersonate any person or entity" (ought to make RP interesting) or "promote or provide instructional information about illegal activities." In other words, their TOC is pretty standard, with the usual vague spots.
So my theory is that it will go pretty much like this: if mass exodus from LJ occurs to another platform such as IJ, ultimately the public profile of controversial journals will increase there and become subject to conservative criticism. Assuming the platform wants to cover its ass (perfectly reasonable), it will then attempt some sort of ill-defined "crackdown" in hopes of making the critics happy without completely alienating those who are controversial in their journals. (What else would you have them do? Ignore the possibility of getting their asses sued, or sharply curtailing any journaling activity that is remotely objectionable?) And people will abandon ship and move on to whatever new platform has come up that hasn't yet realized this is inevitable, and the whole cycle starts over again.
This is just my take based on what I've seen thus far. Future events may well prove me wrong, but this is where I stand right now, and it's pretty much where I've stood since this started.
You can't expect a journaling platform to be perfect in its policies about controversial material when it exists within a society filled with confusion, double standards, and litigious conundrums on the topic.