*looks at previous post*

*squeaks in terror*

A big blanket thank you to everyone who commented and passed around the link so people can see the exchange for themselves.

But I also feel like I need to reiterate something that I've said previously: 6A/LJ is private property. I understand that. I also understand that 6A/LJ has the right to dictate the terms under which we use their service.

My problem with 6A/LJ is the same as it's always been: Sucktastic customer service, of which the linking issue is just the latest example.

The policy as spelled out by "Alice" (who I think is simply a nom de plume used by all members of LJAbuse) has not been spelled out in any public forum where customers can read it over for themselves, it's not part of the ToS as it currently exists, and it's yet another example of 6A/LJ going back on its word that we the customers would have at least some input into any major policy changes.

I also understand what exactly "Alice's" message said: As it stands LJ will not be seeking out and checking your links for ToS'able content. Instead, they plan to leave that to the trolls who'll have easy access to a "Report Abuse" button when they finally find something in your old posts that will make your life marginally more difficult.

LJ also will not suspend or delete you for ToS'able links, nor will it count as one of the two strikes against you, provided they can tell from the context that the link was not ToS'able at the time you posted it (i.e., some porn-porn-porn operator is now where your cool link used to be).

Of course, where this leaves people who are posting ToS'able links because they want to discuss an issue/situation/problem that's being discussed elsewhere is really an open question.

Also left for an open question: What will constitute "proof" to the satisfaction of LJAbuse that you didn't mean to post a link to dirty-bad-wrong-dot-com? We've already seen evidence that artists slapping "these characters are over 18" all over their erotic artwork are still getting suspended and strikes against them whenever LJAbuse randomly decides that the disclaimer is a big ol' lie.

In short, my big ol' problem with the linking issue — other than the fact that I've never encountered anything like it in the more than 10 years I've been online — is that "Alice's" word does not hold the same weight as a public post on one of the official forums. We also (again) have no transparency about the process LJAbuse goes through to investigate a complaint, guidelines that LJAbuse has to follow when reaching a resolution, or a step-by-step process a customer can go through to appeal a "strike" if it is leveled against their journal.

In short, we're relying on the word of someone who is probably a volunteer with no decision-making authority discussing the linking issue in broad terms in private messages. Someone higher up in the food chain can counter the assurances given (such as they are) and do something completely different.

Besides, it's not like 6A/LJ has gone back on its public and official statements to the customer base over the past few months, is it. [/sarcasm]

Because, remember, we are responsible for what we link to and we've been told that it's probably a good idea to go back and check our links. Not just any blogroll we've got to the right or the left of our entries, but every single link ever linked in an entry.

That's not even taking into account that we, the customers, still don't have very clear guidelines about what's ToS'able and what isn't. Somewhere between the (not allowed) child porn and the (allowed) Nazi-white-power-race-baiting communities is a big ol' field of grey that is not defined at all.

It's that field of grey that's the killer. Step onto the wrong shade grey, even if it (from your point of view) is a lighter shade of grey than the stuff that's allowed, you could find yourself with (at the very least) a suspended journal and a strike closer to the banhammer.

And on another note:

If I hear "child porn" or even just "porn" thrown out one. more. time. as an "example" of what's ToS'able, I'm going to scream.

For the last freaking time people, this isn't about child porn or any other kind of porn. Child porn is the shiny, shiny, shiny example that 6A/LJ keeps throwing out hoping that it'll get the discontents to shut the hell up. It's the big, fat, ugly stick that certain trolls and outside parties who want to "clean up LJ" are using to beat people who've got the temerity to disagree with them and call them exactly what they are: "trolls and vigilantes." It's the big ol' paintbrush that is being used to paint everyone who's pissed off about 6A/LJ's bad customer service as drama queens and whiners.

In short, it's the weapon people are trying to use to shut down debate about what is fundamentally a bad customer service issue.

So for the last time:

Thinking that LJ/6A is overstepping its bounds; asking LJ/6A to finally come clean and update the damn ToS so that everyone is clear about the ground rules; and demanding transparency in the overall disciplinary process does not equal drama queening because someone is taking away the Harry Potter pr0n or harshing on fandom's dirty little pleasures.

I'm not saying that there's no drama queening going on (because God knows there most certainly is), and I'm not saying that for some people that it really is about the right to access porn of all stripes (because God knows that for some people it is).

The fact is that for an awful lot of us (probably the majority) it's about demanding that 6A/LJ act like responsible landlords, grow a damn spine, and start treating us like customers instead of a disposable resource made up of misfits incapable of walking and chewing gum at the same time.

So, for God's sake, stop saying that it's all about porn. Because it isn't.

We shall now return to our regular fannish programming...

Inspired in part by a local friend's decision to watch Star Trek: Deep Space Nine — aka DS9 for those "in the in-crowd" — for the first time ever, and inspired in part by several FLister's who are watching Babylon 5 for the first time ever, I've decided to go on my own private DS9 re-watch.

Let me make one thing clear: I love Babylon 5. I've re-watched the series from beginning to end 4 times: 1 time first run, 1 time on TNT reruns, 1 time on SciFi reruns, and 1 time on DVD.

DS9? I've seen only twice. Once first run, although I missed a significant chunk of the first and second seasons. And once on TNT reruns, although I often missed at least one episode a week.

So needless to say, there are quite a few DS9 episodes I've only seen once *waves vaguely* years and years ago. Yet, oddly enough, there are quite a few episodes that have stayed with me over the years, despite the fact that I have seen them only once or twice.

Weirdly enough, I loved both B5 and DS9 when they were running concurrently. Those of you who were online during that time period can attest just how big of an unpopular opinion that was. In fact, there's a whooooooooole history of wank that runs about as long as War and Peace between not just the two fandoms, but between the production teams at the highest levels of both shows in a grudge-wank that has never been matched before or since.

Ahhhh, Usenet. Back in the days when even series creators would cheerfully engage in flamewars with trolls. (Have I ever mentioned that JMS was spectacular at the art of the flamewar? No? Well, he was. Trust this first-hand eyewitness. It was a thing of pure beauty.)

Not to delve into the tip-of-the-tip-of-the-iceberg wanker-y between B5 and DS9, but...Were the shows similar? Well, yeah. And it's more than just the surface issue of both B5 and DS9 taking place on space stations. There are some surprisingly similar thematic issues that crop up in both DS9 and B5 (and even a couple of secondary and tertiary character names look...ahem...similar). This despite the fact that the universes, worlds, races, and political intrigue (yes, there is at least one Star Trek show that actually had political intrigue) were very different between shows.

( The Dirty, Dirty Secret of DS9 )

Okay, yeah. Definitely singing the praises there, hunh?

Anyway, while I've been undergoing my great DS9 re-watch, I was disconcerted by the fact that the first season of DS9 has aged better than the first season of B5. Part of it is because the budget for DS9 was huge in comparison to B5. So the interiors and exteriors and the special effects shots have a solid, professional look that are sometimes *ahem* lacking in B5. The other part is that the acting from the DS9 cast, while somewhat shaky as the show works out the kinks, is slightly better than the acting we saw out of most of the B5 cast. Certainly the guest stars on DS9 where head-and-shoulders better than the guest stars on B5.

The other thing that helps put first season DS9 slightly ahead of first season B5 is that DS9 came with baggage. That baggage helped DS9 as much as hurt it over the show's run, but when it comes to the traditional first season liftoff, DS9 was definitely helped. The most DS9 had to do that first season was introduce the characters and paint the situational background in broad brushstrokes (and, unlike just about every single Star Trek show that came before and after, plant the seeds for most of the story arcs that came over the next seven years). B5 had to build an entire freaking universe that first season. End result? First season B5 got stuck with lots and lots of awkward exposition to not only introduce the characters and the B5 universe, but to also "move around the furniture" (as JMS calls it) to set up the action for the remaining four years.

Although I admit that DS9 had solid advantages over B5 — especially when it comes to the traditional first-season set-up — I found myself warming almost immediately to the first season DS9 when I started re-watching. This is in contrast to B5 which — much as I love it — takes me until at least until 'The Parliament of Dreams' (7 hours' worth of watching time) before I can fully immerse myself in the B5 universe.

Oh, dear. It may turn out that in the long run, I prefer DS9 over B5 after all.

Quick episode reactions under LJ-Cuts to preserve innocent eyes...

( Episodes 01 and 02: Emissary )

Overall, I think this re-watch started off with a bang. I can't wait to move on to the rest of Season 1.