Beginning the conversation

[theljstaff]

As we're sure you remember, one of the goals LiveJournal, Inc. set last year was to review and post new policy guidelines in our 100 day planWe know you've all been waiting a long time for this to happen, and today, we're taking an important step in accomplishing this goal. We've reviewed, clarified, and posted a draft set of policies, and we'd

Comments

[yep_i_am_dennis]

HATE SPEECH

ABOUT TIME!

[brotherskeeper1]

+1

[ckll]

It was about time things would be more strict concerning child porn and harassment.
Thank you for this.

[shamess_the_elf]

[ithinkitisayit]

And whether fictional children are to be considered exploited when people post nudes of them (when said fictional children are drawn as a cartoon in said image, and not a manipulation of a real child's photo).

[shamess_the_elf]

[cacahuate]

When adult content flagging was introduced, I was under the impression that it was not mandatory. I'm dismayed to see that this policy requires graphic adult content to be flagged.

[marta]

It isn't mandatory in that there is no negative repercussion for not marking it as such. If it's flagged enough times and is reviewed, the only thing that might happen is that it has an "Explicit" setting administratively set.

[cacahuate]

Unless that setting can be easily reversed, I have problems with this-especially since I remember a primary argument for implementing the system being that it would be a voluntary way for adult community maintainers and others to easily restrict their own content by age. Why can't users be the ones to determine who can and can't see their content? Is there some legal reason for this, and if so, why wasn't it an issue before this system was implemented?

[kita_malice]

I also agree with this comment

[imaria]

To save time of many users looking at this, from the definition linked from the document regarding what is and is not child pornography:

This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.

[nightsinger]

haha, thanks. XD

[imaria]

Erk, read on below ;/ "Non-Photographic images of minors" has it's own heading.

[nightsinger]

Ah, but images != text. So while fanart could be questionable, and their definition of what makes someone in a drawing a "minor" versus "of age" or "engaged in sexually explicit conduct" versus "sexually suggestive conduct," or similar.... They at least state clearly that it'll be subject to the 72hr suspension+warning system. Which is a hell of a lot better than the INSTANT BALEETE + BANNINATE nonsense.

[flamingtoilet]

Well done.