?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
29 November 2007 @ 07:05 pm
Am I adult themed enough to qualify for "Adult Concepts"?  
ETA: lazyangel wrote a fantastic post in response to this that I think everyone should read, because not only is it thoughtful, it's wise.

So LJ News/Releases/Biz just announced we can rate our own journals... and if someone isn't logged in and we've rated them "Adult Concepts" they have to click a little button that says they're over 14.  (I tried it... that's what happens).  I don't know what they have to do if we decide our content is explicit... but I'm curious....

What do you guys think of this new system?  Is it weird?  Is it worth it?  Will you use it?  Is it going to annoy the crap out of you?

here's the link to the biz post explaining what it is

So, it's poll time....


Poll #1097548 The Great Adult Labeling of LJ

I think the LJ Content rating thingy is

A great idea!
1(5.9%)
A very bad idea!
2(11.8%)
An ok idea... but it's going to be tough to execute properly
12(70.6%)
A wonderful way for trolls to get back at eachother
1(5.9%)
Not as bad as it looks
1(5.9%)

Do you think people will use the setings for their own LJ? (i don't want to get personal)

Yes, immediately
2(11.8%)
Yes, eventually
2(11.8%)
Maybe, but people are going to think about it for a while
9(52.9%)
Nah
3(17.6%)
Never!
1(5.9%)

Do you think this is going to help with the whole adult content thing?

Yes, totally
0(0.0%)
Yes, but it turns us into Adult FF.net
1(5.9%)
Maybe... we'll have to see
5(29.4%)
No, because LJ abuse will still mess stuff up
6(35.3%)
No, because others won't use it
1(5.9%)
 
 
 
Mal: gibbs gun by cosmicatmalnpudl on November 29th, 2007 09:48 pm (UTC)
I hate this more than words can express.

It's one thing to allow us to choose to use these settings -- or choose not to use them -- on our own LJs and our own posts to communities. I have no problem with that.

It's another thing altogether to set up an anonymous system for tattling to Big Brother. HATE. HATE.
my monkied brainkatekat1010 on November 29th, 2007 10:01 pm (UTC)
I agree with you that the flagging option is the place where things are going to be REALLY problematic. Not only because it brings the possibility of LJAbuse sticking it's nose in everywhere, but also because, based on their track record, there's no way LJ is going to be able to handle the nonbogus stuff, much less the bogus stuff (and because I truly believe they're not going to differentiate as well as they should/could).
sl_podcastsl_podcast on November 29th, 2007 09:50 pm (UTC)
It really is a good thing for the company itself to say "hey we did what we could to stop it" if someone comes after them for a lawsuit. I don't think it's horrible - but I don't think it'll stop anything either.
my monkied brainkatekat1010 on November 29th, 2007 10:03 pm (UTC)
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Because I do think it's nice that LJ is trying to set up something for US users to do - a way that we can take action without having to shut down our journals and go elsewhere.

I am super worried about the implementation of the reporting side though - they haven't really addressed how they're going to handle mis-reported posts and the like.

But, like everything else, we'll have to see.....
literate and stylish: heroes - hrg gunmishloran on November 29th, 2007 10:02 pm (UTC)
I don't get it. Isn't that what friends-lock etc is for?

I certainly won't use it. My LJ is flist-locked but only occasionally more than an '18' certificate anyway. But then I guess I use my LJ more as a diary than a LOOK HAWT MEN INSERTING THEIR PENISES (peni?) INTO EACH OTHER type thing. Hmmm.

(Why would a child be surfing for shit like that anyway?! I have spent probably half my life using the internets and I've never been offered free porn or come across (haha) anything dodgy, really. ...Sigh!)
my monkied brainkatekat1010 on November 29th, 2007 10:06 pm (UTC)
LOL. Well, the only problem with friends lock is that if people aren't on LJ (silly people) they can't see your stuff, yes? I think for the fandom world it's the difference between only being seen by your friends and having the possibility of being seen by others and widening your audience.

And I wonder about my own posts that have nudity in them... should I go back and mark those as adult content now? I have little warnings, but not major ones.

As far as the searching for porn when you're too young thing - this really isn't going to stop it. People are going to find it if they're looking, and as you so helpfully point out, they're not going to find it if they're not looking for it! I have come across lots of dodgy things, even in google searches (but perhaps my brain is more bent? i dunno)
literate and stylishmishloran on November 29th, 2007 10:09 pm (UTC)
Plus, isn't putting a "CLICK HERE IF YOU ARE OVER THE AGE OF CONSENT" button on things just going to be like telling a kid not to stick his fingers in the electricity socket? It just makes it so much more enticing...!
Professor Fancypants von Deth, Esq: Words Hurtdwg on November 30th, 2007 12:46 am (UTC)
Yeah, I was with it right up to the flagging options. That's probably where all the SNAFUs are going to happen with trolls going ker-azy. On the upside, hello F_W on the matter.

I don't intent to use the system (as a commenter pointed out, isn't this what filters are for?) as I trust a NSFW warning is suffice for the occasional naked women arts posts I might make. Surely saying "fuck" a lot doesn't qualify?
my monkied brainkatekat1010 on November 30th, 2007 01:11 am (UTC)
Yeah, my first thought was - what about the drama wars?? They're going to go OFF the charts with the ability to tag with vengeance and extreme prejudice.

and honestly, i have NO idea what qualifies. I've never done more than use the NSFW title, and didn't really ever consider locking even during the great debacle (but then again i know i'm a pretty tiny fish in a very big pond, and there aren't many people besides my flist who actually know i exist, much less would take the trouble to find me horribly objectionable)

IMO fuck is far too good a word to stick it behind even an "over 14 only" button :D
Professor Fancypants von Deth, Esqdwg on November 30th, 2007 02:18 am (UTC)
OTOH, according the FAQ, "flagged posts" will be moderated by the Abuse Team, so they will probably be able to judge if it's a flamer revenge or geuine concern. Thanks, FAQ.
Muriellemurielle on November 30th, 2007 04:18 am (UTC)
Foiled yet again. Couldn't answer your poll because I don't know enough about this. And only one question had an answer I could honestly "click".

I think it's weird. But, since I've been on LJ there have been a few different things that have caused flap, major and minor, then things just went on as they always had. Lots of storms, lots of broken teacups, not much else. ;-)
Cantakerous troubadoursonder on November 30th, 2007 05:18 pm (UTC)
From my brilliant girlfriends' journal:

Ranting and raving
katekat1010 made a post about the new adult content rating for individual LJ accounts and when I started to respond to her in a comment, I realized that I should just post about it here because it was going to be angry and ranty.

Basic Principles of Children and Media (internet, video games, music, etc):

It is not the job of the rest of the world to parent, supervise, or even care about your children.

There is a lot of content out in the world that is confusing, misleading, or inappropriate for your kids. New technology makes it easier to access that content than ever before, but the solution isn't to ban it or make it hard for the rest of us (adults, both psychologically and legally) to get a hold of it, just because you are too busy, lazy, or uncomfortable to monitor your kids and talk to them about the things they may find in the Big Bad World.

The solution is as follows:

1. Be involved in your kids lives.

2. Talk to your kids about sex and violence, and why you are concerned about the messages they hear and the images they see.

3. Be open to talking about the things that no one wants to talk about. If you don't teach your kids how to be responsible about sex, drugs, power, and money, it's damn sure that rest of the world will, and will do it to support its own best interests, not theirs.

4. Teach your kids to think critically, evaluate the validity of the information they receive, and make sure that they realize that the rest of the world will happily make money off of their decisions to buy, watch, listen, and consume. The most important thing, regardless of the decisions they make, is to just be conscious of what they are doing, the impact it has, and why they're doing it at all.

5. Realize that nothing you can do is going to protect your kids 100%. In fact, they shouldn't be protected! They should have the trust and reasoning skills to make their own decisions about how they think, feel, and act. Yes, they will make stupid decisions, because they're kids and there are basic, biological reasons that kids are incapable of making the right decisions for the right reasons until the age of 20. Let them make mistakes and let them learn that there are consequences to making mistakes. How else are they ever going to make responsible decisions unless they know that they aren't invulnerable?

Child-rearing in the modern age is all about "protecting" your kids. This is stupid. Yes, you don't want them out in downtown at 3 a.m., but you also have to teach them to be responsible. Dependent, self-centered children will develop into dependent, self-centered adults, and all around crappy human beings. Protecting them from the world is the worst thing you can do.

So, all of this leads back to "adult content" warnings. Be they CDs or LiveJournals or whatever, I think they're kind of dumb. Sure, they're fairly harmless, and if places like Walmart refuse to sell items with those warnings, that's their decision as a company and yet another reasons I will not support them. Are they useful? I find it doubtful. After all, if the cd has a picture of shirtless guy with "Thug Life" tattoos holding two giant hand guns and is called Get Rich or Die Trying, chances are he's not singing about kitties but is rather singing about drugs, hos, and killing folks. In the same vein, if your child is unattended on the interwebs and is looking at websites called worldofwhorecraft.com, chances are he is not, in fact, trying to spec his new Night Elf hunter.

Granted, some of this is nostalgia at the good old days of the WWW when porn was free, chat rooms were fun, and MUDDS actually seemed revolutionary. And at the same time as I don't condone kiddy porn or identity theft, I am not thrilled about my online experience being controlled by lawyers and soccer moms.

I need to start a website called monitoryourowndamnkidsandleavemealone.com
Cordykitten: awmp thinkingcordykitten on November 30th, 2007 05:59 pm (UTC)
In theory it's a good thing. I'm worried about the trolls using that and LJ don't overreact if someone is a victim of a troll.