?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Okay, I've got an idea. In my days of rampant LJ wandering, I've… - The Veritable TechNinja [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
The Veritable TechNinja

[ website | ~/public_html ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Apr. 13th, 2003|12:23 pm]
The Veritable TechNinja
[status |indifferentindifferent]
[waveform |Sorority hos giggling incessantly and blaring dumbass music]

Okay, I've got an idea. In my days of rampant LJ wandering, I've found some genuinely disturbing people. Before LJ, I had no idea there were people out there who actually make things like drawing Harry Potter "slash", creating in-depth fantasy lives about vampiric killings, and writing chronicles of S&M date rape into intricate hobbies. Hell, they acquire a genuine following for it. So, I figure it's about time to create a community dedicated to shaking one's faith in mankind, one wackjob at a time. My fear, however, is that it would turn in to one of those ljdrama/nonuglies kind of things, drawing in the other kind of disturbing folk, who get their kicks from antagonizing and abusing people. I'm not out to humiliate anyone, ultimately it's their choice to be messed up, and I'd rather it stay in LJ than seep in to their lives. Kind of the same idea that stileproject and rotten have. Knowing the general population would join simply to find victims to abuse, defeating the purpose of giving people a reason to be decent to eachother. I'd end up having to set up this draconian system of rules, checking up on people constantly to make sure they're not breaking them, basically creating a lot of authoritarian busywork for me. Still, it's something LJ doesn't have that I'd join if it existed. What do you folks think?
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-14 12:24 am (UTC)
... then you'd have to deal with the Feds spying on all the users.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-14 05:54 am (UTC)
In some of the cases (the criminal, not just the wonky), I'd _want_ the feds checking in to them.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-14 10:36 pm (UTC)
Criminal these days can mean just thinking the worng things, tho.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-15 05:57 am (UTC)
But with a personal sense of morality, doesn't that require by definition that there are some thoughts you don't believe people should have?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-15 12:33 pm (UTC)
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

There have been times in the past when I've been confronted with issues of drugs, betrayal, and other people's wives. I've always made the morally correct decision in these cases, but that doesn't mean there wasn't a part of me that was tempted. So I can only rightfully judge a person's actions, not their thoughts.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-15 01:14 pm (UTC)
I'm talking more in the sense that there are folks that are just fantasizing about killing people now, but may kill people later. True, we all fantasize about killing someone at some point in our lives, but I'm talking about mental health. The persistence of thought, consciously maintained and in-depth thought, or (to bend the scope of the discussion) acting out. Sort of like conspiracy law. The intent to commit may not be concrete, but the desire is (provably) there.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-15 05:40 pm (UTC)
In that case, I would have a shrink monitor it, not the spooks.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-15 06:39 pm (UTC)
But is it more intrusive to commit a man, rather than parole him?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-16 12:25 pm (UTC)
Depends on whether they are going to cross the line between thought & action. Fed Spooks are not the brightest bunch; evidence shows that they are, in fact, downright stupid for the most part. So having them be the monitors would simply result in everyone getting assasinated and/or locked up.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-16 01:17 pm (UTC)
I'm talking the parole board, not the NSA.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-16 05:04 pm (UTC)
Ahh now that is diffrent! I'm sure people who've already got records are definately worth watching, the parole board would be just the people to do it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: arcsine
2003-04-17 05:47 am (UTC)
So, give the parole board some basic psychological training, or better yet, hire a few dedicated psychoanalysts to work there. Criminals would be psychologically profiled rather than by record, and those with potentially dangerous impulses would be monitored more closely than those who committed spontaneous, provoked, or "necessary" crimes.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-17 12:55 pm (UTC)

=)

You, unlike our our congressmen, make damn good sense!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nephilimnexus
2003-04-17 12:55 pm (UTC)

=)

You, unlike our our congressmen, make damn good sense!
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)