http://news.livejournal.com/125326.html?thread=83019150#t83019150
It's not clear exactly what happened here, but why would a staffer choose to make a random comment on an entry using their staff account? How did they even find their journal? As far as I can tell what happened is that the staff person does admit to leaving a comment on an entry which was in 'bad taste' and then deleting it, but then it's unclear whether the entry was locked (as the person alleges) or not (as the staff member alleges).
More disturbing are the allegations made by this person, although they admit to 'trolling' in the past, so they might not be a reliable source. However... do volunteers really have the ability to see locked posts? Or is it only closed support requests?
It's not clear exactly what happened here, but why would a staffer choose to make a random comment on an entry using their staff account? How did they even find their journal? As far as I can tell what happened is that the staff person does admit to leaving a comment on an entry which was in 'bad taste' and then deleting it, but then it's unclear whether the entry was locked (as the person alleges) or not (as the staff member alleges).
More disturbing are the allegations made by this person, although they admit to 'trolling' in the past, so they might not be a reliable source. However... do volunteers really have the ability to see locked posts? Or is it only closed support requests?
no subject
Date: 2010-05-09 06:43 pm (UTC)But yeah, I know we haven't changed anything there, so if it doesn't work on DW it wouldn't work on LJ either. So, if the comment was on an entry the OP thought was locked, she must've unlocked it at some point (or, I saw someone else mentioning that she might've gotten bitten by that flash embed that made entries public and just didn't realize, since I think I've also seen her saying that one/some of her FO entries were turned public.)
Anyway, this is never going to be anything provable in any direction, since nobody's got screencaps (and even caps aren't probative). It does sadden me that LJ's lost enough trust that the story seems highly plausible to most of the people who've seen it, though. *sigh*