{"id":60,"date":"2008-03-19T05:42:40","date_gmt":"2008-03-19T13:42:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/?p=60"},"modified":"2020-11-26T04:01:26","modified_gmt":"2020-11-26T12:01:26","slug":"nope-no-sex-bisexuality-or-depression-here","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/?p=60","title":{"rendered":"<q>Nope; no sex, bisexuality, or depression <em>here!<\/em><\/q>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><abbr title=\"by the way\">BTW<\/abbr>, for those of you who have not been informed:<\/p> <p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.livejournal.com\/\">LiveJournal<\/a> reports <a href=\"http:\/\/www.livejournal.com\/interests.bml?view=popular&amp;mode=text\">a list of its most popular interests<\/a>.  <a href=\"http:\/\/community.livejournal.com\/changelog\/6258870.html\">On 6 March, <abbr title=\"LiveJournal\">LJ<\/abbr> snuck-in a bit of code that filtered that list so that it wouldn't report <q>bisexuality<\/q>, <q>bondage<\/q>, <q>boys<\/q>, <q>depression<\/q>, <q>faeries<\/q>, <q>fanfiction<\/q>, <q>girls<\/q>, <q>hardcore<\/q>, <q>pain<\/q>, <q>porn<\/q>, <q>sex<\/q>, or <q>yaoi<\/q> as amongst these.<\/a>  After <a href=\"http:\/\/stewardess.insanejournal.com\/228035.html\">the filtering was discovered on 14 March<\/a>, the administration was silent on the matter for days, despite many demands for explanation and for removal.  <a href=\"http:\/\/community.livejournal.com\/changelog\/6283445.html\">The filter was removed on 17 March.<\/a><\/p> <p><a href=\"http:\/\/news.livejournal.com\/106909.html?thread=70124701#t70124701\"><abbr title=\"LiveJournal\">LJ<\/abbr> spokesperson <span style=\"font-weight: bolder\">marta<\/span> declares<\/a><\/p> <blockquote>I don't have a statement for some of your questions. I do know that it was a mistake, and not meant to be a judgment or company opinion of any kind. I will try to have better answers as the day progresses.<\/blockquote> <p>(Note that with her <q>I do know that<\/q>, she <em>insinuates<\/em> that she <em>doesn't know<\/em> more than she reveals.  We may thus be fairly sure that she knows significantly more.  In any case, the administration is plainly stone-walling.)<\/p> <p>While I am not surprised that a change to filter the popular interests would be effected in the same unannounced manner as was the change which filtered specific interest searches, and I am not surprised that something like this filtering of the list of most popular interests would <em>eventually<\/em> be effected, I am none-the-less surprised at <em>just how quickly<\/em> <a href=\"http:\/\/www.sup.com\/en\/index.html\">\u0421\u0423\u041f<\/a> has been moving.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"BTW, for those of you who have not been informed: LiveJournal reports a list of its most popular interests. On 6 March, LJ snuck-in a bit of code that filtered that list so that it wouldn't report bisexuality, bondage, boys, depression, faeries, fanfiction, girls, hardcore, pain, porn, sex, or yaoi as amongst these. After the [&hellip;]","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,69,4],"tags":[3],"class_list":["post-60","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary","category-information-technology","category-public","tag-livejournal"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=60"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11546,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60\/revisions\/11546"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=60"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=60"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=60"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}