![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Oh, for Heaven's Sake...
Dear 6A/LJ,
When I said I wanted clarification of your policies, this was not what I meant.
I meant clarification, not "the ToS hasn't really changed" followed by a bunch of vague statements that still doesn't actually say anything and still doesn't clarify what is and is not acceptable on LJ.
In case you're wondering, the issue is all about how you are interpreting the ToS. Since we can't read minds, we need you to tell us point blank. Which you're not.
And no, we're not whining. This is what happens when your user base has stopped trusting you. We're looking for loopholes where you could conceivably screw us over. This is about protecting ourselves, which obviously clashes with your need to protect your interests.
Really, the comments to the post say it better than I can at this point.
Look, answers in blunt English would be good here. Even if they're answers I don't like, something more than these vague statements and transparency that's about as transparent as mud is not an answer.
*throws up hands*
So much for that clarification...
When I said I wanted clarification of your policies, this was not what I meant.
I meant clarification, not "the ToS hasn't really changed" followed by a bunch of vague statements that still doesn't actually say anything and still doesn't clarify what is and is not acceptable on LJ.
In case you're wondering, the issue is all about how you are interpreting the ToS. Since we can't read minds, we need you to tell us point blank. Which you're not.
And no, we're not whining. This is what happens when your user base has stopped trusting you. We're looking for loopholes where you could conceivably screw us over. This is about protecting ourselves, which obviously clashes with your need to protect your interests.
Really, the comments to the post say it better than I can at this point.
Look, answers in blunt English would be good here. Even if they're answers I don't like, something more than these vague statements and transparency that's about as transparent as mud is not an answer.
*throws up hands*
So much for that clarification...
no subject
As far as I can tell, neither LJ nor SA has an equivalent of that phrase in their ToS. Something as simple as that would help clarify the issue a little more.
But yes - as
Sine SA seems to be trying to market LJ as a marketable commodity on the stock exchange, one would think they would have teams of lawyers and spin doctors analysing every single thing in their ToS to ensure that there are no loopholes or possible avenues of misunderstanding.
no subject
http://www.livejournal.com/legal/tos.bml
no subject
:)