Choosing a new default icon

[bohemiancoast]

OK, I'd like your help. I've nicked the idea from Good/Bad Delphic polling. You might find that FAQ 111 helps, or the additional explanation from my email that "In particular, images of the female breast that depict the nipple or areola regions are inappropriate for use as a default userpic." I'm very grateful for that clear delineation; it's so helpful to have an absolute hard and fast rule.

With that in mind, which of the following would be an acceptable LiveJournal default icon?

[Poll #745962]

Comments

[palatinate.livejournal.com]

I didn't fill in the poll as I don't consider rationality necessarily applies. In particular, given what I read about LJ abuse, I think they could well decide to make negative interpretations of icons from people they think are deliberately trying to test the rules. So they may ban the abstract circles coming from you, who is clearly engaged in the debate about this topic, but not ban the same icon from someone who's not involved in it. Sadly, that means they could potentially come after any of the icons you suggest, not because it violates the original rule but because they think you're testing them.

I think the current LJ abuse position is absurd, but I'd note that at the end of the day they're human beings who have got themselves into a corner and are taking criticism from many sides. That's a recipe for a cornered reaction.

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

And the abuse team don't get paid to take this criticism either. it interests me at a professional level as someone who's recently been investigating ISP abuse teams - a strange and murky area..

[pigeonhed.livejournal.com]

I don't get paid for being criticised over my opinions either. The LJ abuse team are volunteers, they chose to be dogmatic rather than conciliatory on this issue.

The problem comes back to Six Apart not providing sufficient training and guidance, and not accepting that although the abuse team are volunteers the management are still responsible for their actions.

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

It also comes back to 6 Apart not wanting to incur possible legal liability for a service provided free to many people - as a lawyer i have a lot of sympathy with this.

[pigeonhed.livejournal.com]

Are 'employers'of volunteers not liable anyway? AIUI 6 Apart have failed to offer guidance to the abuse team. If you accept volunteers without appropriate training does that not leave a company at risk of far more serious liabilities?

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

It really depends what they're doing, Obviously employers are usually vicariously liable for employers acting in course of busines. so if your truck driver runs over a child while driving normally doing deliveries, yes, you're liable. but in this case 6 Apart, I hate to say, have done nothing wrong for anyone to be vicariously liable for. It's a private co. If a co chooses to sell cotton frocks and not vibrators, well, they're liable for nothing, and neither are their call sales operators who sell the frocks. no one has to push things to the limit, especially for no extra money. 6 Apart is not the state - they do not have a duty to pursue or defend ultimate freedom of expression. your choice as a consumer is to go to another private operator who does or will..

[pigeonhed.livejournal.com]

That all makes sense with regard to new icons, but the changing of the ToS to retroactively ban a existing icon is a different matter.

There is also the confused matter of whether the ban on breastfeeding icons is a breach of California law. If it is then 6 Apart have acted wrongly.

[surliminal.livejournal.com]

It's not a ban on breastfeeding icons. It's a ban on using it as your default icon.