If they got here, they were already reading the works of this mangaka I would believe, so don't see the point in having the explicit thing unless people here post pure porn..
I am a bit baffled by this entire new arrangement by LJ. I experimented with my own journal. Turned some of the scan posts to EXPLICIT ADULT CONTENTS and logged out and then when I attempted to read them as an annonymous reader. All I have to do was click on a declaration that I am over 18 and I was in there looking at all the glorious mansex ^^;;
So it is pretty much meaningless - it is more an attempt for LJ to cover their own backsides. This way they delegate the guilt to any willful underage party who decides to deliberately view contents they have been warned about...
Also - all flagging achieves, apparently, is the placement of the flagged post under the same 18+ warning. Posts are not going to be removed - all suggesting the aforementioned back coverage...
I voted for the second option... as a sign of good will...but it will hardly make it unaccessible as, say, locking the journal altogether from non-members.
All I have to do was click on a declaration that I am over 18 and I was in there looking at all the glorious mansex ^^;; Wahahaha Well, I suppose it helps cover their asses at least~ XD
Posts are not going to be removed - all suggesting the aforementioned back coverage... And let's hope it'll stay that way ^^ The events of recent LJ witch hunt are still fresh in my mind :/
Same here - lost three people of the f-list to the strikethrough ... and then someone complained about my journal this only week so the first thing I did this morning when I saw the new rules was to stop breathing... but it looks like the good ole' mansmut will go on anyway... which is the most important thing ^^
Though I think option two is more sensible, number three will actually cover the community up. Under 14 is still minors, and it would, on the long way, bring problems.
If members f-lock an NC-17 post and give warnings before an lj-cut, that should suffice.
My feeling is that using their little system to pre-designate journals & comms just paints a target and makes it easier for them to filter and find the 'questionable' ones during the next witch hunt---I mean, next implementation of *shiny new user tools*.
Comments 8
Reply
Reply
So it is pretty much meaningless - it is more an attempt for LJ to cover their own backsides. This way they delegate the guilt to any willful underage party who decides to deliberately view contents they have been warned about...
Also - all flagging achieves, apparently, is the placement of the flagged post under the same 18+ warning. Posts are not going to be removed - all suggesting the aforementioned back coverage...
I voted for the second option... as a sign of good will...but it will hardly make it unaccessible as, say, locking the journal altogether from non-members.
Reply
Wahahaha Well, I suppose it helps cover their asses at least~ XD
Posts are not going to be removed - all suggesting the aforementioned back coverage...
And let's hope it'll stay that way ^^ The events of recent LJ witch hunt are still fresh in my mind :/
Reply
Reply
Reply
If members f-lock an NC-17 post and give warnings before an lj-cut, that should suffice.
My feeling is that using their little system to pre-designate journals & comms just paints a target and makes it easier for them to filter and find the 'questionable' ones during the next witch hunt---I mean, next implementation of *shiny new user tools*.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment