?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
05 June 2006 @ 10:33 am
Changes to ToS  
Should Permanent Members have any special protection against changes to the LJ Terms of Service, since we can't simply 'take our money elsewhere'?
 
 
 
Nightvyxennightvyxen on June 5th, 2006 09:52 am (UTC)
It be nice but I doubt that it would Be considered.
I hadaPermanent account onUjournal and when that went under My Account was transfered to A day ina life servers - However as for my Permanent account that wasn't transfered i did notget my money back andI was basically granted "Free user access" When my account was transfered.

Nasty yep but alesson learned and hopeful LJ won't beas bad as that but i won't hold my breath either. 8(
kunzite: ljkunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 10:11 am (UTC)

no, but i think deleted accounts should be removed from membership of this community and not re-instated. because that's just silly.
prince on June 5th, 2006 11:07 am (UTC)
co-sign.
(no subject) - empres77 on June 5th, 2006 01:54 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - adudeabides on June 5th, 2006 01:26 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 01:28 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - supercarrot on June 5th, 2006 02:16 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 02:19 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - supercarrot on June 5th, 2006 02:25 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 02:27 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - supercarrot on June 5th, 2006 02:40 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 02:45 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - supercarrot on June 5th, 2006 03:06 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 03:11 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - adudeabides on June 6th, 2006 12:29 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - camomiletea on June 5th, 2006 06:13 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 07:07 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 01:58 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 07:24 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 07:29 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 07:36 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 07:41 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 07:45 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 07:53 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 07:55 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 07:58 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 08:05 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - frumiousb on June 6th, 2006 08:11 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 6th, 2006 08:17 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - purplecthulhu on June 7th, 2006 03:59 pm (UTC) (Expand)
Schneelockeschnee on June 5th, 2006 10:39 am (UTC)
No.
qfemale: TV - Lost - Pearl Stationqfemale on June 5th, 2006 10:59 am (UTC)
Somebody enlighten me please as to what TOS § we are discussing here?
I have been far to busy yanking my hair out over my French class that I could spend time on LJ.
And right now, I am just procrastinating studying for my finals anyway!
Sunny Piper, Girl Reporterangriest_girl on June 5th, 2006 11:09 am (UTC)
Nipplegate '06. You REALLY don't want to know.
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 11:11 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - angriest_girl on June 5th, 2006 11:12 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 11:14 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - angriest_girl on June 5th, 2006 11:16 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 11:18 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - angriest_girl on June 5th, 2006 11:20 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 11:22 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - angriest_girl on June 5th, 2006 11:26 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 11:28 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - most on June 5th, 2006 01:29 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 01:31 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - most on June 5th, 2006 01:48 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kunzite1 on June 5th, 2006 01:49 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - qfemale on June 5th, 2006 11:42 am (UTC) (Expand)
Rube J. Sofer: George - Still sucksrube on June 5th, 2006 12:11 pm (UTC)
Here's my input on the whole boob-o-rama-gate crud: There's a general tendency pretty much everywhere to condemn nudity and glorify violence. User pictures with tons of guts and blood fly through the filter whilst images of mothers breast-feeding their young'uns get swatted.
To me, that seems unhealthy. Why is nudity such a bad thing? I'm glad I live in Denmark and not in the United States of Hypocrisy.

As for the whole ToS-protection thing: It would be nice if we had protection. But it wouldn't be fair.
Kensteelbrassnwood on June 5th, 2006 12:24 pm (UTC)
Oh, you mean "tolerant" Denmark? No hypocrisy there, of course.
(no subject) - rube on June 5th, 2006 12:37 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - steelbrassnwood on June 5th, 2006 12:40 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - rube on June 5th, 2006 12:43 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - steelbrassnwood on June 5th, 2006 12:50 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - rube on June 5th, 2006 12:59 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - steelbrassnwood on June 5th, 2006 01:06 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - xtomxfallsx on June 5th, 2006 09:14 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - steelbrassnwood on June 6th, 2006 02:55 am (UTC) (Expand)
Kensteelbrassnwood on June 5th, 2006 12:24 pm (UTC)
Who cares? If you're that worried about protecting your $150, why did you spend it on a LiveJournal account? Hide it under your pillow instead.

And as far as this nonsense over the icon? Again, who cares? Surely, there is some other injustice in the world worth your time and energy.
yndyyndy on June 5th, 2006 01:20 pm (UTC)
Er... no.
Because part of the TOS when we all signed on for perm accounts was that the TOS can/would change with suitable notice.

Now, if they added a clause that said "permanent accounts will not be subjected to changes of TOS" the *next* time they offered them (unlikely) then it might be the case...
But we all signed on with the supposed understanding that TOS were subject to change.

In other words: you agreed to it when you paid your $$ - that you don't like it now doesn't mean you get it back.

God of Thunder and Rock'n'Roll: LJ Addictarchmage on June 5th, 2006 03:19 pm (UTC)
No. The ToS is what it is: what you agree to with the service, whether that's free, s+, or paid. Just because we all ponied up excess cash at once so we never have to do it again doesn't really give us much of a "special status," and certainly doesn't make us immune to ToS issues. We like to think highly of ourselves, but, really, we're just anothr account, and, like any laws, the ToS binds us, too.

PermAccounts were always sold sparingly. The money they bring in is great for lump sum needs, but they don't generate any further revenue, so, in the end, it's not a great business decision. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if they never offer them again, esp. with 6A at the helm.

As for the whole "breastfeeding" thing? Man, I'm tired of hearing about it. I may personally not agree with an image of breastfeeding being obscenity (seems pretty normal to me), but the fact of the matter is that LJ, being an American company, is going to default to the general American public's view on nudity, and a female nipple, like it or not, rings that particular bell. It's not an injunction aganist breastfeeding, it's not an editorial comment on anyone, it simply is a case of public standard. Hating the company that abides by that standard is pointless; if you don't like the standard, work to change it, but, like any activist, you better be prepared to deal with your violations while you work.
...and a cute argumentative girl to wrestle withdamnitnicole on June 5th, 2006 07:02 pm (UTC)
Seconding this comment %100.
(no subject) - yueni on June 6th, 2006 01:02 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kittygopounce on June 6th, 2006 01:33 am (UTC) (Expand)
Nuggieccnuggie on June 5th, 2006 06:04 pm (UTC)
The tos has always stated no nudity in your default user pic...that includes your titties, even if a kid is attached to it.

If you think your titties are ok to post, then I'll be glad to show you my cock with a condom of the tip of it...I'm sure you'll appreciate that just as much.

Silly broads.
Cassandrafirewallender on June 5th, 2006 08:35 pm (UTC)
Agreed.
If it's ok to disagree ... - the_magician on June 7th, 2006 01:57 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - yonmei on June 8th, 2006 07:56 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - ccnuggie on June 8th, 2006 05:27 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - yonmei on June 8th, 2006 05:33 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - ccnuggie on June 8th, 2006 05:35 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - yonmei on June 8th, 2006 05:39 pm (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - ccnuggie on June 8th, 2006 05:43 pm (UTC) (Expand)
...and a cute argumentative girl to wrestle withdamnitnicole on June 5th, 2006 06:57 pm (UTC)
No.

...: Girl & Her Catcookiegirlie on June 5th, 2006 11:26 pm (UTC)
No.

You're stabbing my cortex when you know I'm insane: Bert and Ernieglowing_dragon on June 6th, 2006 12:41 am (UTC)
No.
ファビュラス マックス: endlessjai_dit on June 6th, 2006 12:55 am (UTC)
No.
purpleCthulhu: poweredpurplecthulhu on June 7th, 2006 04:11 pm (UTC)
I think the central issue here is one of influence and commitment.

By purchasing a permanent account we have all shown a higher degree of commitment to LJ than any other class of user.

However, those users with paid accounts and sponsored accounts have a direct and easy way to influence LiveJournal policy - not paying, or not viewing LJ and thus not generating paid advertiser hits. Permanent account holders can do neither of these things.

Is it fair that those of us who have shown the highest level of commitment to LiveJournal should have the same level of influence on policy as someone who has a free account?

This is what purpletigron is addressing. It doesn't matter whether this concerns Nipplegate, Abuse policy, sale to 6 Apart or anything else in specifics, it is the general principle that is in question.

And if you feel that permanent account holders should have more influence than sponsored account holders, how should this be provided? Immunity from ToS changes is one possibility, but there are bound to be others. For example, should LiveJournal have some kind of supervisory board on policy, on which permanent account holders are represented (this is a model that works well for many European companies)?