OHHH. I was thinking you may have meant their syndicated feeds being anti-linking.
On one hand, I can understand their stance - syndicated content comes in from another site entirely, no user on LJ is responsible for what's ON that site, and the person who IS responsible for it isn't on LJ. It's kinda like if you subscribed to a newspaper, and you were held legally responsible for something published in it.
All they can really do is delete the subscription, which they say they can't do (but I know they can). Like I said - I submitted a support request for it but have yet to receive an answer.
On the other hand, their anti-linkiness is complete bull shit, and they have no good way to enforce it. We think that WE found a loophole, they say we haven't - but that creates a hell of a lot MORE loopholes? My gawd, 6A. There is absolutely NO SANE WAY to enforce that rule.
no subject
On one hand, I can understand their stance - syndicated content comes in from another site entirely, no user on LJ is responsible for what's ON that site, and the person who IS responsible for it isn't on LJ. It's kinda like if you subscribed to a newspaper, and you were held legally responsible for something published in it.
All they can really do is delete the subscription, which they say they can't do (but I know they can). Like I said - I submitted a support request for it but have yet to receive an answer.
On the other hand, their anti-linkiness is complete bull shit, and they have no good way to enforce it. We think that WE found a loophole, they say we haven't - but that creates a hell of a lot MORE loopholes? My gawd, 6A. There is absolutely NO SANE WAY to enforce that rule.