?

Log in

LJA and friends-locked entries - lj_abuse didn't work out [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
lj_abuse didn't work out

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

LJA and friends-locked entries [Jun. 2nd, 2006|11:22 pm]
lj_abuse didn't work out

abuse_lj_abuse

[cdaae]
An unfortunate effect of sensible rules is that if you post something here raising specific concerns about specific cases, the abuse team members say they cannot respond here because the case is private - however, if you write to them privately, they don't respond to that either.

Last week I emailed Mark and Denise about a statement made here by shamanix about abuse team procedures, which contradicted what they had done in my case. I haven't received a reply. A couple of days ago I forwarded the email to Six Apart's contact address, as well as the CEO and VP. Haven't heard from them either. If I hated telephones less I would have given them a call about it today.



Email to Six Apart/LJ
To: contact@sixapart.com, Barakb, anil, Kevink
Date: May 31, 2006 12:33 AM
Subject: Fwd: Abuse team and locked/private entries question

I am forwarding you the following email which I sent to Mark [surname], Denise [surname], and the LJ abuse team member [info]shamanix on Thurday May 25th.

I understand that it has been a holiday weekend, but I know that Mr [surname] has been responding to abuse complaints in the past few days, so I am peturbed to have had no response.

If the abuse team has stated rules, clearly steps outside those rules, and implies that a LiveJournal member is lying, I think they have the duty to provide an explanation. I would like to know precisely what violation of US law was being investigated when LJ Abuse representatives looked at my friends locked entries (see below).

I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,
Christine D. Clemens


Date: May 25, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Abuse team and locked/private entries question
To: markf, denisep
Cc: shamanix

I'm writing to directly ask you a question concerning a statement made by shamanix on the abuse_lj_abuse LJ community.

"As has been said in this community numerous times, the ability to view locked/private entries is limited to LiveJournal's actual employees, and is only used in cases of copyright complaints or violations of United States law."

http://community.livejournal.com/abuse_lj_abuse/73671.html?thread=3101383#t3101383

As I replied there, "Untrue in my case. There was no copyright complaint, and no alleged violation of US law. In fact on the first occassion, my journal was not reported at all - they thought I was [info] yellow_finch, who had been reported for breach of a NONC, and then went into [info] cdaae to have a look."

Shamanix also replied to another user bringing this up, here: http://community.livejournal.com/boob_nazis/1763041.html?thread=20281313#t20281313

"What people report and what actually happen are sometimes two very different things, as I'm sure you're well aware.

As you've quoted from my comment to [info] abuse_lj_abuse, I feel I should point out that all abuse cases are confidential and that team members cannot comment on specific cases."

I would like to know precisely what violation of US law was being investigated when LJ Abuse representatives looked at my friends locked entries. Yellow-Finch was reported for breach of a Notice of No Contact, on the grounds that an entry she made was presumed to be referring to a specific user. This is not a matter of copyright or breach of any law. As her username used to be cdaae13 and mine was cdaae (both referring to the character Christine Daae from The Phantom of the Opera), the abuse team decided I was the same person as her. When I received a suspension notice about it, a friends-locked entry from my journal was referred to.

Please inform me on what grounds my friends-locked entries were read.



They did unsuspend the account a few days later with apologies (followed by resuspending it on other grounds); I'm not addressing any of that, but I do think that they absolutely need to answer for their actions in the light of their stated policy in regards to locked entries. I think this is a perfectly reasonable question, and it's disppointing that they can't be bothered to answer it.

I realize that the abuse team is on their "abusefest" in Vegas so Mark and Denise are probably quite busy, but Mark has been responding to abuse complaints so here's clearly been around.
LinkReply

Comments:
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-02 11:30 pm (UTC)
http://community.livejournal.com/abuse_lj_abuse/36404.html
http://community.livejournal.com/abuse_lj_abuse/59953.html?thread=2634801#t2634801
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-02 11:35 pm (UTC)
None of that answers my question.

In fact, "All use of this ability is logged (who's doing it, when they're doing it, who they're doing it to, and exactly whatthey're looking at -- an entry, friends page, lastn view, etc). The combination of employee only and heavy logging provides a high level of accountability and responsibility in the use of this privilege" - doesn't even mention what shamanix recently said, that viewall "is only used in cases of copyright complaints or violations of United States law."

That's what I'm asking them to tell me. What was the violation of US law? There was no complaint against my journal, and the complaint against someone else they were looking into wasn't about copyright or violation of US law.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-03 02:12 am (UTC)
Hmm - edited it to remove surnames, though they're posted on LiveJournal's own site so it shouldn't be a problem.

The emails I just guessed at by using their username @livejournal.com, but if I get told by LJ Abuse to remove the email addresses naturally I will do so.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: shamanix
2006-06-03 02:23 am (UTC)
Or you could just be nice and do so of your own accord. I'd prefer not to have my e-mail address advertised, even if it is just the @livejournal.com version.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-03 02:34 am (UTC)
NP.

Perhaps you could nudge them on answering, as I realize that you may not yourself have access to the answer.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-03 03:02 am (UTC)
Stop being so unreasonably curteous.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: 7rin
2006-06-04 06:00 am (UTC)

comment edited to remove email address

<quote>
Yeah, because no one on earth could possibly figure out that you might be reached at [username]@livejournal.com unless someone advertises so. Everyone is altogether too dumb to make that connection.
</quote>
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-03 03:29 pm (UTC)
Could you be any more self righteous for us?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-13 09:59 am (UTC)
It's taken 2 days so far for someone to answer my abuse report, which is pretty damn important to me (journal suspension). What on earth is going on?

I mean, I accidentally created two, and someone was able to respond to the second within a couple of hours to inform me that I'd be answered on the first only. So why can no one respond to that?

I'm quite irked right now that no one can even tell me why it's taking so long. You deleted one of my friends journals by mistake at the same time, thinking it was me, and she's not been answered either.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-03 03:00 pm (UTC)
holy shit, get over it
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-03 03:03 pm (UTC)
Since the abuse team are either lying about their policies or failing to act in accordance with them, I don't see why I shouldn't continue to bring it to their attention.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-03 03:28 pm (UTC)
Sue shamanix for libel, implying someone is lying is defamatory, disclosure of documents to court would sort it all out.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-04 02:23 pm (UTC)
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply.

I do realize that a lot of questions can't be answered publically because they involve the privacy of other people, not necessarily just the person asking the question. I think a lot of the frustration some of us feel arises out of the fact that we feel we don't get actual answers to our questions through the official channels. Someone left a comment here, then deleted it, saying I should have submitted this as an abuse request, rather than sending an email to Mark and Denise, but if your last support ticket was closed without response I don't think it's unreasonable to write directly to the employees of the company (particularly since this is a question that the abuse team volunteers probably can't answer, as they're not the ones with the authority to make decisions about looking at locked entries).

I do think that the problem with hostility goes both ways. People on the abuse team deal with a lot of ire, and I'm sure that often it's about decisions which are completely reasonable, and clearly explained in the FAQs and policy document. But there's the perception that legitimate questions also get ignored, and that perception doesn't come out of nothing. Abuse team members are wary about giving responses in public because it attracts hostility, but equally users are made to feel that if we speak out in public we're labelled as troublemakers and anything we say will be discounted. I only included shamanix in this because he's the one who made the statement about when locked entries could be read; I have no reason to believe that he doesn't believe that to be the policy, or that it isn't what the policy is supposed to be. I copied my email to him because it was the polite thing to do, since I was quoting his comments. I see from the news thread that posting here has got me labelled as someone out to fan flames though, so how can I trust that anything I say regarding any future abuse complaints will be listened to fairly? That's probably why so many people here lately have left their comments anonymously.

When we get an abuse team response they're signed with someone's first name, and we have no way of knowing what user that is. Obviously that's necessary to protect the volunteers from harassment, but we just have to trust that they won't pick up a ticket when they have personal biases against someone. It's not easy to admit to our own biases, and it's a natural response to want to put the boot in. And yes, that does go both ways, and it's true that my experiences have also made me less willing to give the abuse team the benefit of the doubt.

LJ abuse members obviously care about LJ enough to devote significant amounts of time and effort into being volunteers. I think a lot of other LJ users also care about LJ - otherwise we'd just dump it and use a different service when we're pissed off at how things are being run. People put time and energy into their communities, and it's the community aspect which gives LJ its value to us over alternative services. Some of the things that annoy people require relatively minor fixes - it's pretty annoying to go to an excellent discussion or article in your memories, only to find half the comments (or the whole piece) are missing because someone got suspended. I know some people, myself included, feel annoyed because we'd like to support LiveJournal enthusiastically, and instead are in the position of being unwilling to get a paid account again.

Obviously the abuse team does have limited resources, but that's why I think Six Apart should be giving LJ a cash injection to put more paid staff on the team. They're buying and launching new services, so they're hardly broke!

Anyway, thank you again for your response, I do appreciate it very much.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-03 04:23 pm (UTC)
Do you enjoy trying to get blood out from stones? They won't reply, every time you bring it up will just move you higher up the shitlist.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-03 08:36 pm (UTC)
I'm confident that they are actually human beings, unless I'm missing out on some really big conspiracy theory.

If asking for a response to a reasonable question puts one on a shit list, that doesn't say much for claims that LJ is built on communication, and members' feedback is at all important.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: nonentity_bob
2007-12-13 04:03 am (UTC)

Re: Dont complain about the CONspiracy, Become the Conspiracy

Get Smart . . . It will take time to restore Kaos
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-03 10:27 pm (UTC)
Oh, I do apologize, it looks like you were right.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: (Anonymous)
2006-06-04 12:09 am (UTC)

told you so!

Your next move is to load up a train with gelignite and drive it under the offices of 6A for your funeral pyre when they permaban you for speaking your mind.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-04 02:23 pm (UTC)

Re: told you so!

I prefer the pen over the gunpowder. :)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: davidkevin
2006-06-26 07:21 pm (UTC)

Have you never have gotten a reply to your question?

(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: cdaae
2006-06-26 08:08 pm (UTC)
No. I suppose I should phone them or something.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: davidkevin
2006-06-26 08:16 pm (UTC)

Care to place a small wager as to whether, once you identify yourself, everybody you ask for is "out of the office this week", "in a meeting", "just stepped out", or "away from their desk", and whatever voicemail you leave gets no reply whatsover?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)