(PS your name reminds me of a derby name, and my ol' school favorite: Beyonslay)

How dare we use the same freedom of expression as these guys? I mean, obviously, the guys posting these images are internet heroes and we're just some thin skinned broads, whining.

No problem. I don't think it will hide you from them, but at least it will hide them from you. Depending on what changes are being made on the platform though, it may not be effective for long.

"I also wonder if a website is viewed worldwide what happens when the actions are illegal in the complaining user's country?"

That's a good point. I think that the original plan of 'blocking individual users' probably should have handled that issue. Someone posted a script on GT the other day if you haven't seen it. It might help.

Moderators aren't usually the authors, and given that they normally expect to see the worst shit, its not nearly as upsetting. I've seen some vile shit as a moderator, but I also expect to.

Its just a nice way, I think, to show someone you appreciate their contributions. I don't read my private view either, but I do follow a lot of people.

Well, "following" now and "following" in the earlier case don't do the same thing. Now following someone just means that their comments/posts show up in your private view feed. Before it actually triggered a change in your account. People stopped using the follow function when they realized it didn't do anything.

Thanks Lauren! As usual, your team is fantastic.

In an earlier iteration, you had to have "X" number of followers to be an approved/promoted commenter.

We don't respond to requests on the invitation threads because it can quickly devolve into arguments, but usually if you haven't been added, its because we haven't seen enough activity on GT. We want to invite people who want to be part of the community, not just people who will be a part of it only if they can…

Probably not — most of the permissions are site by site.

That's part of the function of the platform. Every blog has an approved poster list, from the mainpage to the subblogs.

I legitimately just teared up reading that.

I didn't say 'appeal to me' I said, 'appeal to my bosses'. That's how it works. If you don't like it, I don't know what to say to you. And your question wasn't 'will you, Slay, abuse your power' it was "what is stopping the Jezebel staff from'. The answer to that question is "ask someone else to review the incident'.

Yes, yes, I get your point. You're super concerned about your own ability to post whatever you decide is a 'dissenting opinion' in whatever unfettered way you may wish to. Yes, you may end up getting banned for it. Yes, you might feel like it's unfair. It wouldn't matter if it was me or Jessica or Tracie or Steve or…

I was awfully pleased with the hashtag graveyards.

What I'm saying is that by the way they're created, you couldn't limit a burner to one site. Or one burner account.

Well, that's the million dollar question, right? Have they benefited from it? If it's really useful, how can the system be adapted to serve multiple needs?