Disagree If You Wish

I’m with Warriors For Innocence on this one.

Taken from Warren Ellis.

The thing is, in general I do not trust individuals or groups who say that they are the only things that stand “between evil and the innocent” or some such slogan. But child pornography, child abuse, pedaphilia, and the like are some of those subjects that have a bit of a knee-jerk response with me.

Do I think that LJ went too far and possibly deleted some innocent sites? Yeah, it’s possible. It is not as if I have been seeking out internet predators online, trying to root them out. I have no personal experience with the sites LJ deleted, but if they only deleted things by interests and if support/survivor group sites (aka Lolita sites) would also have those interests … it seems obvious that some well-meaning sites probably got the axe.

Still, I think that WFI has their collective heart in the right place.

Edit: And now LJ has started deleting accounts based solely upon interests? OK. They have definitely gone too far. I still agree with the sentiment of WFI, but somewhere this has gotten out of hand.

Advertisements

8 responses to “Disagree If You Wish

  1. mmm, is what they are looking for bad? yes, absolutely, but i disagree with the way they are handling it. deleting journals and communities with that as an interest, doesn’t solve or help the problem any. it doesn’t even hinder it.
    Plus, LJ is going against their very own TOS, which says it would give warning and allow the offending material to be taken down, in this case, an interest.

  2. Possibly deleted some innocent sites? Well, sounds like you were only about two or three days behind the loop … one of the first communities to go was a Spanish-language group for discussing Nabokov’s Lolita; another victim was a roleplaying journal – clearly advertised as fictional – of a villainous Snape ancestor for a Harry Potter roleplaying game. As I understand it, some of the personal journals that were deleted were those of child abuse/incest survivors. I’m sure this was a great way for them to feel protected!
    Warren Ellis, whose writing I enjoy greatly, is a hypocrite of the highest order. He’d be the first person screaming censorship if it were his writing targeted, and I’m sure these “Warriors” for Innocence wouldn’t hesitate to attack his writing in other circumstances. , who’s written a lot on the subject by now, has actually worked with members of child protection organizations of the kind WfI claims to be and has called them out as the sub-par phonies they are.
    It is exactly over the subjects that are most important and most sensitive to us that we need to not make knee-jerk decisions. I am positive that this hullaballo is helping the real predators hide while scaring away many, many genuinely good-hearted people from legitimate organizations.

    • Possibly deleted some innocent sites? Well, sounds like you were only about two or three days behind the loop …
      The loop and I are not friends. We are rarely in the same place at the same time.
      And you are right, especially about the knee-jerk decisions. But it’s hard sometimes, you know?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s