?

Log in

BACK DOOR BOY IN A FRONT DOOR WORLD
OUTSIDE OF SOCIETY - THAT'S WHERE I WANT TO BE
Jesus H. Christ, Here We Go... 
29th-Nov-2007 08:04 pm
New Settings & Flagging Tools
More »

LJ has added a new tool that allows users to flag inappropriate or offensive content. Trolls everywhere just got wood. This is going to be exploited by all the wrong people and used as a means of revenge on those that don't deserve the shitstorm they're about to see.

I see this as possibly being a good thing used in a bad, bad, baaaad way. I'm not even going into the censorship angle. Oh, my poor lj_abuse team friends...
Comments 
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:09 am (UTC)
Not that, the flagging system is what I am talking about - for the people who have to work Abuse, it'll be plenty problematic.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:23 am (UTC)
Censorship, for starters. Besides, you and I both know LJ asshats that will flag others simply to be asshats - which will be a big clusterfuck for Abuse.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:44 am (UTC)
No, but can you really blame them for it? It IS Muskrat Love for fuck's sake.

Shame I'm not an asshat - I'd so flag the shit out of the religious communities.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 06:55 am (UTC)
Hell, people are already starting to flag really ridiculous things specifically to cause problems for Abuse, because obviously going after the customer service buttmonkey is the way to get a business to do what you want ...
30th-Nov-2007 04:19 am (UTC)
Have you heard the old adage about "giving a camel an inch and he'll take a mile?" This is how it starts. The first step toward full-bore censorship.

I for one, am offended by religious content; would that be something I should flag as "inappropriate?" Under the terms, I could. Just as under the terms, someone could flag my posts when I talk about my non-belief in deity.

Again, who decides, ultimately, what is and is not "inapprpriate?" If the Supreme Court, in their landmark decision, cannot even decide what "pornography" is, then dear gods, who on the 'net of all places is going to be able to define "inappropriate?"

No; this is a bad idea. If some members of the LJ community are afraid of their underage children seeing "inappropriate" content, then they need to be teaching their children not to look at things they deem so instead of expecting the rest of the world to police to their sensitivities.
30th-Nov-2007 01:15 am (UTC)
There is rate limiting on how often you can flag things, and if your account is too new you can't flag anything. So while there will certainly be trolls abusing it, hopefully the impact on Abuse won't be too bad. :)
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:23 am (UTC)
It's not bad. :) It's just a matter of people being nervous about not having 100% control over their own stuff. Even though nothing happens until the Abuse Team checks it over, many are skeptical about it anyway.
30th-Nov-2007 01:24 am (UTC)
And aside from the issue of censorship, I'm sorry for all of the Abuse folks who are going to have to deal with yet MORE abject bullshit.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:29 am (UTC)
Well I think you don't reply to me enough when I specifically ask you to, so there. :p *thbppt*
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:38 am (UTC)
*issues a fatwa on you*
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:45 am (UTC)
*beheads your durka*

The first one, not the second.

*glares menacingly at the second durka*
30th-Nov-2007 02:25 am (UTC)
There are people who believe that any approving mention of same-sex anything is inappropriate for people under 18 and will take up arms to suppress it.

That's an example of why this is a problem.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:39 am (UTC)
Didn't think about that, that would make LJ at work rather convenient.
(Deleted comment)
30th-Nov-2007 01:46 am (UTC)
You can - on the edit post options/settings.
30th-Nov-2007 03:18 am (UTC)
hmm I wonder how long it'll take for me to get flagged ...
30th-Nov-2007 04:11 am (UTC)
It's absolutely ridiculous! I have no intention of flagging any content, mine or anyone else's. It is not my responsibility to police the Internet for anyone else but me and I refuse to do so for anyone else.
30th-Nov-2007 04:36 am (UTC)
agreed. totally.

it seems like an attack on free speech.
30th-Nov-2007 05:43 am (UTC)
Well, FWIW, I think they have good intentions; however, this is not the way to go about it. This would have been better if they didn't give just anyone the ability to flag posts as "inapproprite," as that is just far too subjective.

If LJ is really concerned about this, then they need to set and publish guidelines and/or rules about what makes a post "inappropriate." I'm not comfortable with all the wiggle room in a subjective evaluation.
30th-Nov-2007 02:08 pm (UTC)
Ok, I'm fine with being able to tag your own content to keep little brats from bugging you, but I do NOT think that is a call that should be made by anyone else. Its too easy for any lackwit with an itchy trigger finger or an old vendetta to be obnoxious.
30th-Nov-2007 04:30 pm (UTC)
Great. This is also fuel for those who like to swarm and swirl around gossip and defamation... maybe we can see the birth of new LJ communities like "Badbearprofiles 2", "Moar_Flounce 2" and "Ripd2Shreds" (put it out there, and it's fodder for the taking).
This page was loaded Jul 27th 2017, 4:55 am GMT.