Monday, June 25, 2007

Bong Hits

Some of you may remember the Alaskan student with the "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner back in 2002. Students were allowed outside during a special assembly in order to view the Olympic Torch and runner pass by. Joseph Frederick unfurled his banner and held it up in order to attract television cameras' attention. The principal confiscated his banner and destroyed it on the spot and then suspended him for ten days.

Joseph Frederick brought a federal lawsuit
, claiming that his father [an employee of an insurance company which provides insurance to the public school he went to] lost his job [and was subsequently awarded a smooth 200,000 bucks in damages] and thus Frederick the younger had to drop out of college. No year was given for that. In 2004 Frederick the younger pleaded guilty in a case involving the misdemeanor sale of pot at a University in Texas. It seems that Joseph Frederick's former principal was right on the mark.

The Supreme Court has affirmed the right of principals and teachers to limit First Amendment free speech in schools.

radical sapphoq says: A sad day has come to us all when school principals and teachers have to get a high court ruling to defend the enforcement of an anti-druggie behavior school policy. An even sadder day when conservative groups side with the student for fear of limiting student speech in regards to opposition of homosexuality or abortion.
This student took a historical event and turned it into a mockery, and then had the nerve to declare that he was asserting his right to "say anything at all." Or, alternatively state that he'd seen the slogan on a snowboard and thought it was cute, nonsensical, or worth of emulation.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Bush and getting Bushed

Most people aren't all idiot or all genius but a mixed up blend.
Bush is no exception.
imo, given the "choices" we had last time, Bush had the most
leadership ability out of all of them.
Quite frankly,
and I may not be rational in this but this was my belief when Carter
was around and still is,
when those Iranian student terrorists took over the American Embassy
27 years or so ago, we shoulda bombed that entire damn country
and cut our losses.
I feel bad for the hostages as I am not inhuman.
But the fact is, we cannot negotiate with terrorists.
The nine hostages would have had a nice monument somewheres
built for them
and perhaps 9/11 would have been delayed or not happened at all.
As it was, the Ayatollah Khomeni went around laughing his ass off
about the USA being impotent and unable to act decisively.
Consequently, we became opportunistic fodder for anyone with a
bomb or a gun.
Bush's mistake was in not nuking the whole entire area.
The war has dragged on entirely too long and if it was
a clean in and out sweep, things might have been better.
So we still have a rep of not being able to act decisively.
Four ppl were arrested last Saturday at JFK airport.
Reason: that airport was a target. Had they not been
Meanwhile, Bush has gone soft on the illegal alien issue and
I'm pissed at him for that. Newt Gingrigh however you spell
his name got on the airwaves and read the Mexican law
concerning what happens to United Statians who try that
border trick in reverse. The mediacs, not realizing what he
was reading from, were quick with their accusations. Newt
didn't write the Mexican law. He was just reading it.
I am not a fan of Newt most of the time and I am not a
christian dominionist and in fact not a christian.
However, Newt did nothing rascist by reading from the law
of another country. Furthermore, some of the illegals when
they had their usa-wide protests back in May, had a sign
that read "Read your history. This IS our country." So
now Texas and parts of Arizona are to become part of Mexico
as they wish, not officially but in another way.
I do not agree with some of the things Bush has done and I do
not share the same christian values that he has. However,
I would have respected him far more if he hadn't backed down
regarding illegal aliens, period.
Bush is far from an idiot. His college transcripts bear witness to that.
And Hill the Pill-- sorry. I live in New York. I have no love for her.
She is phony. How do I know this? I've listened to her talk about
the hot-button feel-good issues and I think she should go live in
Massachusetts with Martha's crew. At least that would get her the
hell out of my state.
Guiliani in 2008.
Respectfully and with love even though I am a political hothead,
spike q
ps One of the things that I really like about the team blog "Itching for a coffee"
is that we do not all agree. The exposure to different viewpoints as well
as differing life circumstances and different spiritual or religious paths
is a great thing.
Friendship extends far beyond any ideological boundaries.
Meanwhile, I am involved in the Live Journal clusterfuck. Getting rid of
pedos is a good thing. Getting rid of folks at random who had "incest"
listed in their interests [because they are survivors or in one case a
sociology student] is moronic and then for some Whackkkos 4 Installationofspyware
group to publish the user names of all of the suspendeds and labeling them
pedos when in fact most of them were not is a truly bad thing.
To compound their sins, Live Journal's idiot make fake apologies and the
team then brought back a few of the pedos [without thorough investigation first]
and left some of the survivors still suspended.
Contacting their abuse team in the past about harassment or any other matter
led to a polite form letter, "We can do nothing." Yet some whacKKKos show
up threatening to boycott the advertisers and boom goes the hatchett.
Writing fanfic which involves sexual activity is not the same as seeking out
kids under the age of consent.
The community which discussed the classic book Lolita in Spanish was one of
ones suspended. It was brought back.
Years ago, Live Journal bloggers were aware of a pedo on live journal and they
got the word out via reporting on the news articles about his arrests plural and
the situation. The abuse team suspended the reporters and left the pedo to
do as he will.
Back to my corner now.

spike q.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007

Live Journal Strikes Out continued

Information can be found here at

Research indicates that l.j. has still not restored some journals and communities that were suspended on the basis of words in an interest list. Some of those should be unsuspended.

Research indicates that some journals and communities that were suspended ought to stay that way.

Fandom journals and communities should be allowed back.
Survivors journals should be allowed back with many public apologies.
Journals and communities which advocated child rape or teen rape under the guise of "love" should not come back.


Saturday, June 02, 2007

The End of Live Journal as we know it...

A better and more plausible explanation for the livejournal strikeout 2007
Read the post.
Then read her updated post over at Greatest Journal:
[Her lj would not allow her to update.]
Then Google "Six Apart IPO."
The bastards are getting ready to go public, i.e. offer stock.
It's not about protecting kids from sexual predators after all.

posted to lj_news:

Going public livejournal/Six Apart, eh?

Perhaps that was really more of what this whole fiasco was originally supposed to be about in the first place; not really about saving children from sexual predators.

It can be found on Google search engine as well as on various blogs throughout the internet.
To those of you still in the dark:
Google "Six Apart IPO."

Therein lies the answers.
And the end of live journal as we have known it.

How utterly sad.


Six Apart Price Pool?

SixApart IPO speculation starts

One reason why Six Apart would buy Live Journal

[thanks lj user shamangirl]

Friday, June 01, 2007

Questions Regarding LJ/6A Policies by L.J. user unfilthy

Long-time Live Journal User unfilthy has written an excellent compilation of questions and concerns about Live Journal policies in light of the recent nefarious l.j.strikeout 2007. Below is the post as it appears at and reproduced here word-for-word with permission:

Questions Regarding LJ/6A Policies

I've compiled this list because I felt the need to sort through the various concerns and issues raised by LJ/6A's recent words and actions, and writing things down is the only way I know to sort through the piles of information swimming around in my head. I originally posted it as a comment (actually two, as it was too long) to one of LJ's recent news announcements, but with 4998 other comments, and no ability to edit my thoughts, I figured I might as well post it to my journal as well, and possibly get feedback from my friends in case I've missed something (or add links and quotes as needed).

The following is directed at TPTB at LJ/6A

While it's good that you've apologized for screwing things up, and it's good that you're restoring the unjustly suspended journals, and it's good that you've started informing us of your actions in real time now, there are still quite a few issues that still need to be addressed, IMO.

1. The frankly bizarre claim that a journal's interests should be read as likes. Not only is this not the way the members of this site use this feature (not to mention the linguistic improbability of it), but followed to its logical conclusion, it means that the numerous journals and communities for and by people who are suffering from a variety of diseases, who've been hurt or affected in some way by any form of illegal activity, or who are involved in political debate surrounding any controversial issue, are, in your mind, expressing their support for that disease, illegal activity, or controversial political issue, simply by listing it as an interest. Will you be changing the LJ profile page to reflect this unusual reading? Will the interests section be now titled likes? Will there be guidelines telling the user base how to make clear that an interest in cancer, for instance, is an actual interest, as opposed to a like or wish to promote cancer?

2. The types of illegal activities we are allowed to discuss without fear of suspension. What is the future status of journals and communities that include essays, debates, personal accounts, fiction, commentary, fantasy, visual art, or any other form of speech dealing with illegal acts? If a member discusses something illegal, such as terrorism, for instance, or lists it as an interest, does this constitute soliciting or encouraging illegal activities? What about Murder, Rape, Incest, gay marriage, Underage sex, Polygamy, Marijuana, Drug trafficking, Prostitution, Human trafficking, Slavery, Genocide? I, for one, would really like to know where you draw the line in terms of speech relating to those and other illegal things.

3. Determining whether journals are soliciting or encouraging illegal activities. Are 6A/LJ going to actively search for journals they suspect of soliciting or encouraging illegal activities? What are the new criteria for deciding whether a journal/community should be suspended, forced to change its userinfo (or remove content), or left alone? What part will LJ Abuse and its volunteers play in this? Who will make the final decisions? Will there be a right of appeal? Will there be prior notification? Basically, what will the decision making process and procedure be from now on?

4. The "hidden meaning" behind fictional or academic interest. You mentioned the supposed existence of a "thin veneer of fictional or academic interest in events and storylines that include child rape, pedophilia, and similar themes in order to actually promote these activities" as well as your difficulty in telling those apart from fictional or academic interest in these themes that isn't intended to promote these activities. I'd like to know who's going to be the final arbiter of authorial intent. Will you be hiring any consultants who are familiar with the plethora of academic, legal, and political writing debating this extremely complex issue? Will you be working with any sort of professionals in any field relating to this issue? Will you simply rely on the LJ abuse team to judge correctly what the intent was of the people writing the material in question?

5. The inconsistency of LJ Abuse responses. We've heard countless accounts from members who have, over the years, attempted to alert LJ Abuse to the existence of journals and communities that actively and openly encourage illegal activities, including murder, sexual offenses, and other forms of violent crime, and have been turned away, as apparently the LJ Abuse team had been instructed that talking about committing a crime isn't illegal, and so would not be dealt with by LJ. We've also heard that several of those journals and communities are still active. On the other hand, your recent actions indicate that your policies have changed. But then again, you've just overturned your own decisions (and with good reason). So, which is it? Will LJ Abuse be receiving consistent guidelines, and will we, the users, have access to this information?

6. LJ's "zero tolerance policy toward content that supports child abuse, pedophilia, or sexual violence." Since this has not been the case so far, I'd really like to know, what does zero tolerance actually mean? Rape, for instance, is a common theme among women's sexual fantasies. As any person who's studied this subject, or who possesses a reasonable level of common sense for that matter, could tell you, this does not mean that women actually want to be raped. Yet rape is sexual violence. Does this zero tolerance policy mean that any woman who writes about a rape fantasy in her journal is going to be suspended from now on? If she's 17, and so not legally an adult, does this constitute supporting child sexual abuse or pedophilia, as well as sexual violence? Does it make a different if it's posted in a locked post, in a public journal, in a community? What about if the source material of fanfic involves any of these issues, and so is mentioned or used as a basis for fanfic posted on LJ? Is zero tolerance really zero tolerance?

7. Compensation for the owners of wrongfully deleted journals. Fandom is fandom. We've been around for a decades, and frankly, we'd rather gotten used to getting screwed and dismissed. What I'm really interested in, in regards to compensation, are non-fandom journals. I want to know what you intend to do to make it up the survivors of child abuse, sexual abuse, and rape, that you've painted with the same brush as the pedophiles who've hurt them, and whose journals are now listed in various places on the net as part of a list of journals suspended for supporting or advocating pedophilia. The damage you've done there is much worse than anything you could've done to fandom. As a whole, fandom is an incredibly resilient community. As individual women who've suffered abuse, we're not nearly as resilient. What are you going to do to attempt to correct the damage you've caused these women?

I'm a woman, and a feminist, and a member of LJ since 2001, and a paying member for the past 5 years or so, and I would very much like to know what exactly I need to do to make sure my journal isn't suspended, and I don't even write (or read) fanfiction. It's not just a matter of reinstating wrongfully suspended journals, it's a matter of communication and clear guidelines and respect, and above all, TRUST. I want to know these things because otherwise I can't trust that when I wake up tomorrow my journal, or any of my friends' journals, will still be there.