icarus | The Wild Rumor going around.

Entry tags:

fandom

The Wild Rumor going around.

I got suckered, too. There's a wild rumor that LJ's being pressured to ban users.

LJ's Abuse team laughed their asses off when they heard it.

I feel a little silly. Okay. More than a little silly.

On the other hand, I really should have thought of the NC-17 content on my LJ when Henry Jenkins linked to the summary of the FanLib situation and it was then linked to BBC. There will be a traffic from outside fandom in this LJ in particular. Troll protection if nothing else. Although no doubt most of it was yesterday and now it's old news.

The Wild Rumor:

I'm copy/pasting this from ngaio who got it from yin_again who got it from xanphibian:

LJ is being pressured to purge right now. This isn't LJ's fault, so please don't stand up and beat your breast against them.

Because of the recent FanLib thing and the wank over the MJ figurine, fandom is in a pretty bright public spotlight right now, and it's not that great for us.

Outside forces are pressuring LJ to delete journals and ban users. It's been going on for about 12 hours now. It is FANNISH people who are under the microscope.

If you have the words 'rape' 'rapefic' 'incest' or 'underage' in your LJ interests and are able to do so, EDIT YOUR USERINFO to remove them. Any variations of these should be removed, too. If I were you, I'd get rid of anything like 'wincest' or 'malfoycest' or the like. Also 'chan' -- because as soon as these mainstream folks figure out what 'chan' is, they're gonna come down on us.

If you have underage or 'cest fic posted public in your journal, I'd lock it. (this is my Yin's personal recommendation and not that of anyone 'official') Any squeeing over 'cest fics or fic with any underage characters should be kept behind a lock, too.

This is not going to be a long-term thing. A little hiding and editing of our interests while the black cloud passes over, and we should be fine.

If you want, this can be reposted in your journals, but PLEASE filter out RL people and folks who will make a public stink about it. Someone risked their job to let the LJ fen know what was going on, and we want to keep the fact that we have this info as quiet as possible.

The LJ outages today almost certainly are because of this. It is NOT LJ's fault -- LJ has almost always been welcoming and wonderful to LJ fandom. Please be sure to emphasize this if you pass it on. If you know any names of who knew what or who leaked what, KEEP THEM TO YOURSELF.

P.S. Have a laugh at my expense. I should know better to check these things out.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Thanks for mentioning this. When I heard the rumor, I forwarded it to an LJ employee and asked him to put it out of its misery.

Synecdochic's recent comparison of the LJ and FanLib TOS was written before this rumor began, but it conveniently explains why it could not happen.

http://synecdochic.livejournal.com/131502.html?format=light

I should know better to check things out. I guess I've been a little edgy that my LJ been linked to outside of fandom. I mean, it's a compliment, but it's also my personal fanfic journal. I was fine with Making Light and Henry Jenkins, but when Jenkins was linked to by the BBC....

Icarus

Oh gosh, I can see that. Free linkage is very problematic because suddenly you're in places you don't want to be. It's so viral, too.

Honestly, I think a little freaking out because of that is perfectly understandable. I've had those moments of realizing that if anyone in my family or at work were to find my LJ, most of the personal stuff is locked, but the fic isn't, and I have my tags displayed. So it's only a couple of short clicks to find the NC-17 gay pr0n. *headdesk*

(I went through this last fall when I post I made about a local day-trip I'd taken, with pics, got picked up by the local newspaper of a town I'd praised, and they wanted to reprint it. They were savvy about the issues, though. Still, it makes me wonder if I ever got any click-throughs of people who read the article who wanted to check out my LJ -- which since then, completely coincidentally, has been sadly devoid of entertaining travelogues.)

YOU... got linked a HELL of a lot wider, and in a way that makes it even more likely (I'd think) that someone who came to read your summary of the FanLib thing would like to see what fannish activities you have yourself.

I'm not naive enough to think that my LJ is private or anything, unless I lock it. (And even then, I don't know every single one of my "friends" closely.) But still, you get used to thinking that you kind of know who your audience is. It's only natural for it to become really unsettling when you have to adjust those audience expectations, suddenly and drastically, when you weren't anticipating having to.

Oh, thank you. I'm thrilled that the article went so far, wow, but... whoa. This is my personal journal. It is a strange feeling to know that completely foreign traffic that has nothing to do with me, my life, or fandom, is trekking through my front door. Even though it's always been public, it's public the way a storage closet on the third floor behind the back stairwell is public: anyone can go there, but who knows to look?

It's a good thing I started f-locking personal stuff a while ago.

I very much didn't expect this. I was just posting the summary article to ask people to tweak it a bit, and post on David Hewlett's forum where there are non-fanfiction people. The FanLib discussion carried its own momentum.

Icarus

Oh, me, too. *facepalms*

We shall commiserate in our foolishness.

It could be worse. I could have joined FanLib....

Except that you'd never. I agree with your dad; write up your registration experience and add it to your outstanding article, and send it to the New York Times. I'm behind you 100%, or next to you -- whatever you need.

Eh, I posted about it too. I'm not sorry. If it had been for real and no one said anything about it, it would have sucked a million times more than posting about it and being wrong.

Point. Except I lent credence to the rumor when I pulled out of some communities (just in case curious people browsed my profile and thought, "

pornish_pixies? What's that?" and started clicking away).

You're not alone. I posted the rumour on. Then I f-locked my most explicit pieces of fic - then I wibbled.

Have let all the fic hang out again, but have put a disclaimer on my profile page. Which is probably worth less than a handful of peanuts. And what makes it worse is that I read

synecdochic's post about safe harbours.

All that said, I shall be poking around your LJ this bank holiday weekend - am intrigued by the essay linked at the top of your page about writing magic. So, just thought I ought to introduce myself as it were.

I'd read

synecdochic's post, too, however I thought that I might be asked to lock content that was deemed "offensive" to people outside fandom cruising by.

Icarus

Oh. Forgot to say: welcome. :0

Well, y'know, given the MySpace thing (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/technology/22myspace.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) this week, I think you weren't completely out there worrying.

I'd maintain that it might not be a bad idea to worry about underage and chan stuff (though I really wish rape and incest and other things where the *fiction* has not been found prosecutable, would not be thrown in there)...

Oh. Wow, I didn't know about that.

though I really wish rape and incest and other things where the *fiction* has not been found prosecutable, would not be thrown in there

I was thinking more along the lines of people cruising the BBC-Jenkins links back to my LJ and then freaking out about the content.

I'm thinking that I'll only post my fic to my website, with an off-site link and then a link back to LJ comments, the way

astolat and

rageprufrock do it. I've been considering that anyway.

Icarus

In other countries, the courts have upheld the right to written, fictional pornography of these sorts. I doubt with the composition of the US Supreme Court now that it would happen here, HOWEVER, I think that legality and prosecutionability of people on the internet is a troubling enough bugbear for law enforcement that fandom should pause before panicking.

(Sorry for the incomprehensibility and misspellings here, I am rather drugged.)

It looks like the real issue is Six Apart bowing to pressure from vigilante groups and issuing blanket deletions to cover themselves legally.

Icarus

I think the actual story is still clouded. Maybe in a week we'll have a better picture of what happened (or maybe never).

Yeah. One thing I know: these vigilantes pre-date FanLib. They contacted Six Apart back in April.

Icarus

I love you anyways. ♥ ♥ ♥

You're so sweet.

Icarus, if you really don't mind being linked in Henry's blog, you should probably leave a comment there to that effect. I just wandered past there to see if there was anything new, and someone who spotted you leaving communities clearly genuinely thought it was because you were upset about the link in Henry's blog to your summary post, and asked him to remove the link.

(And unfortunately, to provide proof of what she was asking, she linked to three posts where you had posted that you were leaving to protect the communities from exposure until this blows over. I'm not big on asking people to delete other people's comments, but... she sort of defeated the purpose you were going for there, and I'm sure she did so completely unintentionally.)

The comment is by FANtastic, timestamped May 25, 2007 6:11 PM

*headdesk* I forgot to mention -- of course, feel free to delete my comment(s) here if you want to keep a low profile about leaving the communities!

It was mistake to post that I was leaving. Like, who cares? I figured out (eventually) that that was stupid and I left other communities temporarily without all the drama. *snort*

Icarus

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. This is what I replied:

FANtastic, I do appreciate your concern, but I am tickled pink that I was linked to Professor Jenkins' blog. In fact, I linked back to his post here in my summary.

A troll tried to attack my critical comments regarding FanLib on Mashable (http://mashable.com/2007/05/18/fanlib/) (comments that later became that summary) by linking to explicit fanart for one of my stories. I posted a link to the NC-17 story (http://www.icarus.slashcity.net/stories/begmeforit.html) in question and a copy of my invitation to FanLib, suggesting they take a look at what they'd requested.

Belatedly, it occured to me that right below my summary was a series of story recommendations including NC-17 slavefic and steamy Wincest, and various links to other people who might not be too comfortable with the exposure. This morning I was sent an alarming message from several trusted friends who were as duped as I was by what turned out to be an LJ hoax concerning deleted LJ accounts. I've worked very hard to establish a readership and it would be a heavy loss for me. The hoax has been exposed and I've locked reference to others' work. It's not a problem.

I guess we're all a little jittery at the exposure FanLib represents.

Icarus

I saw your departure from communities, realized that I'd seen your name a lot in the FanLib stuff as linked by

metafandom, and didn't even realize that this particular scare was going around until one of my friends smelled a rat and wanted to double-check things with me. I may not be any form of Official LiveJournal Person outside of helping keep order in

suggestions, but I do know who to ask about this sort of thing.

So she IMs me this morning wanting to know if I've heard anything about this, and pastes the hoax warning at me. It sounds like something I would have heard about if it were real, and it's got facts completely wrong all over the place, but just to be sure I figured I'd better ask.

Cue some "that's so hysterical, no" and some "... ahahahaha" and some "hahahahahahahahahahahahaha", topped off with a "wincest sounds like a new product from Mr. Gates that promotes incest somehow. NEW FROM THE MAKERS OF WINDOWS. WINCEST." from a bystander, and the hoax radar went from *blip* *blip* *blip* to *BLEEP* *BLEEP* *BLEEP* *BLEEBLEBLEEBLEBLEEP* -- it's one thing to get details wrong, but when there's a basic fact wrong and I can check it and prove it false in less than five minutes, then the whole thing stinks on ice. (For what it's worth, it sounded far more like the helpless laughter that comes with "Wait, what?!" rather than "wow, these crazy people will believe anything," because it was just such an unexpected interruption to everyone's peaceful morning.)

The phrasing really did discourage contacting LJ administration in any way, so I'm really not surprised that people didn't immediately think to go and complain/inquire.

It says repeatedly that this thing isn't LJ's fault, painting LJ as sympathetic but having no choice, being the pawn of the same organized bloc of mundane-type forces that fans seem to be up against. Fandom as a whole tends to respond really well to calls to keep a low profile and to keep a conspiracy of silence. We're used to operating in the margins and under official notice; there's this group paranoia that contacting anyone official about something related to fanfic is going to bring the law down upon the party and bust everything up. This hoax played on that willingness to keep the silence by explicitly saying to filter out everyone not known sympathetic and in fact anyone who might be willing to step up and take the risk of contacting someone and finding out the truth. The truth kills, after all...

If I didn't know and trust the usual Official LiveJournal Crew people the way I do, I think I might have been reluctant to contact them after reading that. The only personal risk I took in contacting them was the risk of looking a little silly in semi-private by asking if they could confirm or deny a rumor. People like you, without that history of trust, and with a lot to lose if the rumor was true, would be far less likely to ask questions about it.

It was also a lot easier for me to ask them than it would be for a whole lot of other people. I was in the right chatroom to start with, so all I had to do was switch between windows and type a few lines. Someone else would have had to at least compose an e-mail, then wait for a response. The response probably wouldn't have come in anything like real time. There are enough potential bits of trouble brewing that something that looks like a tempest in a fandom teapot might not get taken care of for a while, and meanwhile the wave of silent alarm sweeps along LJ, gathering momentum...

...yeah, I think I'm glad this one got caught earlier than it otherwise might have.

I love this. I added your "transcript" to my next post. "New from Windows -- WINCEST!"

I bought it because it came from friends of mine who knew someone who worked for Six Apart. But then, all good practical jokes are like that. I got my mom one April Fool's because I knew she was worried about out and how he tended to run out in front of our car as we parked. As we pulled in about ten minutes before midnight, and as she carefully rolled in, looking around, I did my best cat-squawk imitation, "MeRWR!"

She froze. It wasn't that good, and I was sitting right next to her. But because it was on her mind....

Icarus

"He" being the cat, I mean.

The "wild rumour" turns out to be true after all Check out

pornish_pixies

Yep. Yesterday I was kicking myself from backing away from the rumor. I was given a very clear message from people who work for Six Apart, so it seems like the LJ Abuse team was taken by surprise.

I'd locked anything I could find that could be considered offensive on Friday.

My opinion? The timing is a coincidence. This vigilante group's been contacting LJ since April, and they've been posting about LJ sex offenders for over a year. The vigilante's deny they're responsible for the deletion of literary LJs, but it sounds to me like they just didn't know the net would be thrown that wide. Typical of vigilantes, innocent people get caught in the crossfire.

A Lolita discussion group's among the deletions for pete's sakes.

Icarus

(Here via flist link) So then, any idea what actually happened to the

pornish_pixies comm and other journals that have recently been suspended (http://catrinella.livejournal.com/151812.html) and for which a vigilante anti-child-porn group is allegedly claiming responsibility?

The vigilante group is denying responsibility, but the fact remains they've been contacting LJ since at least April demanding they delete pedophile comms. They pre-date FanLib, which went live in May.

My opinion? The timing was a coincidence.

My opinion? Six Apart looked into the legal risk (the vigilante group has very strong language) and decided that the interests list could be used to say LiveJournal was promoting these things, so they issued a blanket deletion of anyone with "incest" or "pedophile" listed in their interests.

My opinion? The vigilante group did not expect such a blanket action affecting rape and incest support comms and literary groups. Typical of vigilante groups, innocent people get hurt.

Livejournal says:

Dear LiveJournal user,

Material which can be interpreted as expressing interest in, soliciting, or encouraging illegal activity places LiveJournal at considerable legal risk. When journals that contain such material are reported to us, we must suspend them. Because LiveJournal's interests list serves as a search function, and because listing an interest enables other people also interested in a similar topic to gather and/or congregate, we have been advised that listing an interest in an illegal activity must be viewed as using LiveJournal to solicit that illegal activity. We recognize that many people list these types of interests for shock value, as a method of expressing opposition for these illegal activities, or to indicate fictional activity. Unfortunately, we have no discretion in these cases; if a journal profile is reported to us and contains interests that support illegal activity, we must suspend the journal. Journals, on the other hand, may express or imply interest in illegal activity or express or imply a desire to meet and/or interact with others with similar interests, but only if the journal clearly (1) is in opposition to or condemnation of the illegal activity, (2) does not encourage the illegal activity and (3) is not used in furtherance of any illegal activity. Regards, Cassie LiveJournal Abuse Team

Icarus

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The Wild Rumor going around.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Unsettling.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject