I have been rather unimpressed with LiveJournal’s attempts to defend their icons policy. Two specific examples:

1. The comment by a supporter of Livejournal, presumably , here that:
   

   the entire thing smacks to me of bending to entirely the wrong kind of pressure. I can’t speak for LJ’s policy arm, but if they gives in to a spam campaign, that only encourages the next group that wants a change in policy to engage in the same kind of campaign.

   This strikes me as incredibly politically inept. I appreciate that specifically states that he or she does not speak for livejournal, but telling users that the greater the number of them disagreeing with a particular LJ policy, the more likely they are to be ignored, is not a good way to build a community.

2. The response by “Anil” to a post on John Scalzi’s blog, basically telling everyone to cool it, because there are rapes going on in Congo, without disclosing the crucial element of context that “Anil” is Anil Dash, has been working for SixApart since it was founded.

You know what, Anil? I think my colleagues probably know more about what’s going on in the Congo than your colleagues do. And the way you and your colleagues are handling this issue still sucks.

Edited to add: Anil Dash has emailed me apologising for being “intemperate and rude”, which is more than he needed to, given that it wasn’t my blog he posted on. So good marks to him for that. Let us hope that LJ’s considered response shows the same sane and sensible approach.