muninnhuginn | Countdown to Deletion

Found this rather nifty little countdown (with multiple time zones) at time and date.com,

So when the clock ticks down, I shall be off.

Why?

Because of the insistence on the part of LJ/Six Apart that default user icons showing a perfectly normal, legal practice--feeding a baby--will be banned with refuseniks having their accounts suspended--if there is any possibility that the woman's nipple is showing (or does that include the baby's nipples too? it's so crazy, I wouldn't be surprised... oh, wait, since men's bare chests are acceptable a baby boy will be fine but not, presumably, a little girl?).

And this matters because: first of because it is hiding from view a natural, legal, act. Censoring images of this is a tacit discouragement of the act. In a world where there is money, big money, behind the expensive, less good option and little money, if much passion, behind the healthier, cheaper option.

It also matters because it impinges upon freedom of expression (when default icons featuring works by, say, Gustav Klimt are being banned, we can see it's grown beyond a simple issue of photos of individuals breastfeeding: we're having swathes of art banned too). This matters. This brouhaha may be, ultimately, a small, local spat over something that is not directly life threatening as other instances are. But each time the battle is lost in a small way, we all lose a little freedom.

It's also because the issue has not been handled well by LJ/SixApart. The TOS were changed suddenly, post facto. The ruling is applied inconsistently. And, tho' I hesitate to mention this for fear of extending the problem, it's rather futile. If the case is that certain images cannot be default icons because that's what might be found (accidentally or otherwise) by casual browsers (including minors, who must not be contaminated by images that are perfectly acceptable on anthropological programmes broadcast on TV), then why target the default icon. Folk can modify their journal pages to the extent that no user icon is shown, leaving only one place where the default icon reliably displays: User Info. There's no reason that I can see why I cannot include a picture (bigger than the tiny 100x100 user icon) in my user info in the same way as one might put LJ is love banners. This image would be bigger, just as "accidentally" browsable, and as far as I can tell not covered by the no nipples in default icons ruling.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Dear Six Apart,

I am deleting my live journal--I hope only temporarily--because of the censoring of legal images, both photographs and reproductions of works of art, employed as Live Journal user icons, solely on the basis that a picture of a mother breastfeeding her infant might contain a few pixels-worth of female nipple.

Whilst you may state that Live Journal and Six Apart are not against public breastfeeding, the very act of not allowing its depiction in certain parts of the site is sending a clear message that you see it as less than a normal, everyday act permitted in public places. This is not a useful or healthy message.

I'm also concerned that this censorship has been inconsistently applied, with a retrospective rewrite of the TOS to support the move, and with no clear appeals procedure and apparently rather high-handed tactics on the part of LJ Abuse.

I do hope some sensible arrangement can be reached, both in terms of enabling legal free speech to continue and in improving interactions and relations between upset Live Journal users and the LJ Abuse team.

Yours sincerely,
************** (muninnhuginn)

To which address have you sent this? I need to send something similar.

I'm vaguely wondering about the position of permanent members vs. arbitrary changes to the ToS, too.

Interesting.

Must see if there's anything in permies.

meanwhile, can i whine about the address again? :-)

I used contact@sixapart.com which seems to be their catch-all on the SixApart contact page (http://www.sixapart.com/about/contact) which pickledginger pointed out in one of her posts.

There's no reason that I can see why I cannot include a picture (bigger than the tiny 100x100 user icon) in my user info in the same way as one might put LJ is love banners. This image would be bigger, just as "accidentally" browsable, and as far as I can tell not covered by the no nipples in default icons ruling.

Now that is an interesting idea... Of course LJabuse will still clamp down on it when/if it gets reported with TOS changed at random to support this, but its a way of continuing the campaign.

I think one of the reasons I'm most annoyed is the very cock-eyed, abitrary nature of this. Had it been thought through, properly announced, fairly implemented and senstiviely policed I might not have protested. No bare flesh (they're banning more than nudity, which I believe means no clothing at all) in default icons would have struck me as prudish, but it wouldn't have discriminated against women in general or breastfeeding women whose nipples are visible in particular.

If things were to go as you suggest, of course, LJ would just be living up to our worst expectations....

Countdown to Deletion

Wot I Wrote to LJ/SixApart

Re: Wot I Wrote to LJ/SixApart

Re: Wot I Wrote to LJ/SixApart

Re: Wot I Wrote to LJ/SixApart

Re: Wot I Wrote to LJ/SixApart

no subject

no subject