They admit they screwed up and are looking into reinstatement and have announced an appeals process.
More as it transpires - as of 8 am eastern time,
pornish_pixies hadn't been restored but they've said that things will be within the next 7 hours or so, and if they're not, an appeal still can be made.
More as it transpires - as of 8 am eastern time,
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:13 pm (UTC)um?
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:15 pm (UTC)I too feel optimistic about this whole thing. . .
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:16 pm (UTC)I'm surprised they didn't address the "You only acted because we threatened youra dd revenue" aspect of the WFI bit.
It seems pretty naive not to realize that a lot of poeple might be ocnisdered over the fact that all you need to do to make LJ act like a chicken wiht it's head cut off is threaten their pockets.
Which jsut plays into the whole blow up voer having adds in the first place.
Still though, fair apologize. Actually more than I expected
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 12:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 01:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 02:24 pm (UTC)And seriously, a PR note explaining what they were doing and admitting this was a temporary quick fix to be sorted out once the Hounds O' Idiocy were called off mighta have made all this go a lot smoother. I will never understand a corproations need to try and slip things under the radar like this.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 03:33 pm (UTC)The bad treatment of the Abuse team by TPTB at SA/LJ is breathtaking. I mean, the overall effect of the inept corporate communications is to force the Abuse team to take the hits for all the decisions made, and given that the Abuse team is made up of volunteers that are also LJ users, that's just horrifically bad corporate practice. All three of these instances were actions of the Abuse team badly communicated to the user base.
Not to mention that they seem to be surprised at how fast word gets around when this is a website created to facilitate social interaction. So like, do they even understand what they've built here?
So much drama could be avoided if they showed themselves to be competent. And in the biggest corporate sense, if what they're selling is not services to us, but our eyeballs to advertisers, they're not doing a good job of that, either.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 01:03 pm (UTC)I feel pretty good about this apology and now think I might go forward with renewing my membership. It's nice to see someone apologize and take responsibility for their screwups.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 01:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 01:49 pm (UTC)I hope they establish one.
Re: Barak Has Updated on *news* - LJ "Screwed Up"
Date: 2007-05-31 02:36 pm (UTC)Huh, learn something new... I did not know what Ombudsman was until a few moments ago. {g}
Anyway, I was discussing this with deathisyourart and how fandom is typically comprised of a *vast majority* of gals and how this impacts media genre and vidding and... just look at the SPN 'sexy got scary' ads as an example of shifting demographics involving women... yadda yadda, it was a long discussion.
Fandom's demographics are mostly comprised of women, the same demographic often spotlighted as victims in violence and the same demographic considered the caregivers and protectors of children... and a corporation is telling these same women... what? We can't function without corporate guidance dictating what's 'safe' for us?
So, I can fully understand the outrage going outside 'freedom of speech' because it's, frankly, insulting, *especially* when they *knew* certain journals were for fiction and not some advocate for illegal activities to be performed in society.
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, indeed.
Dina
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 02:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 02:31 pm (UTC)Heidi, if that warning is supposed to be super-sekrit you may want to screen this comment, but I'm just livid that the top brass are suggesting that this was an accident and they really didn't know that fandom would get hit. They're backtracking and stringing us a line.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 05:46 pm (UTC)If it's semi-secret in that it might not be advisable to publish the link, could you e-mail me the URL at my LJ e-mail? I'm on the fringe of the fringes of all this, so it's mostly intellectual curiousity.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-31 05:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-06-01 01:39 am (UTC)This is just...ugh.