They're a business, and they are operating as such.
Then, as a consumer of livejournal's product, users (which includes the whole of fandom) deserve to know: 1) the policy, 2) what it means to the individual, and 3) how - in exact terms - it will be enforced.
Are the people spamming the news community with cat-macros in dire need of a reality check? Of course. Then again, I'm of the mind that 6A/LJ is in dire need of a reality check. Because, telling fans that they won't do [x] prior to a permanent account sale, and doing [x] to a permanent account fan after the fact is *really* shitty.
The fact that some individuals are overreacting doesn't necessarily mean that the problem doesn't really exist.
Not that I am, but I wish people would be realistic.
Fans want the entire cake because they were allowed to have the entire cake for *years*. When LJ tried to take the cake away in May, fans, justifiably through a shit-fit because for *years* prior, they got their cake without even a whisper of a problem. Then, in order to appease the pissed off fans, LJ gave the cake back and conducted a permanent account sale. Following the permanent account sale, they made a few vague clarifications that really didn't clarify anything, promised that no journal would be permanently suspended for a single violation without some kind of prior warning, and then...jerked the cake away *again.*
Fan behavior and expectation is based on years of observing livejournal's behavior, reliance on livejournal's promises, and confusion over what kinds of policies and procedures are now going to be enacted.
Does that make the cat-macroing idiots any less idiotic? No. Does it make the demands for 13 year-old chan any more realistic? No. But it sure as hell provides some context. And, in my book, fandom self-entitlement to have the run of the place was engendered and nurtured by livejournal's behavior - both before and after the May Strikethrough.
no subject
Then, as a consumer of livejournal's product, users (which includes the whole of fandom) deserve to know: 1) the policy, 2) what it means to the individual, and 3) how - in exact terms - it will be enforced.
Are the people spamming the news community with cat-macros in dire need of a reality check? Of course. Then again, I'm of the mind that 6A/LJ is in dire need of a reality check. Because, telling fans that they won't do [x] prior to a permanent account sale, and doing [x] to a permanent account fan after the fact is *really* shitty.
The fact that some individuals are overreacting doesn't necessarily mean that the problem doesn't really exist.
Not that I am, but I wish people would be realistic.
Fans want the entire cake because they were allowed to have the entire cake for *years*. When LJ tried to take the cake away in May, fans, justifiably through a shit-fit because for *years* prior, they got their cake without even a whisper of a problem. Then, in order to appease the pissed off fans, LJ gave the cake back and conducted a permanent account sale. Following the permanent account sale, they made a few vague clarifications that really didn't clarify anything, promised that no journal would be permanently suspended for a single violation without some kind of prior warning, and then...jerked the cake away *again.*
Fan behavior and expectation is based on years of observing livejournal's behavior, reliance on livejournal's promises, and confusion over what kinds of policies and procedures are now going to be enacted.
Does that make the cat-macroing idiots any less idiotic? No. Does it make the demands for 13 year-old chan any more realistic? No. But it sure as hell provides some context. And, in my book, fandom self-entitlement to have the run of the place was engendered and nurtured by livejournal's behavior - both before and after the May Strikethrough.