flickr: i'm Still Calling it Censorship

flicked off by flickr staff

"Your account has been reviewed as unsafe and NIPSA by Flickr staff."

Tell me what's unsafe about it. The account they deleted was reviewed by flicker staff and marked as safe about a couple of days before they deleted it. Latest attempts at checking that i'm moderating my content:

• "Changed safety level on 0 photos.
  
  (Operation failed for 17 photos, which have been moderated by Flickr staff and cannot be changed.)"

• "Changed content type on 0 photos.
  
  (Operation failed for 1 photo, which has been moderated by Flickr staff and cannot be changed.)"

• "You are unable to share this content. Sorry, you can't send "restricted" content. Go back to "how mcdonald's sees your children"

Self moderation was fine before in my original account, which was supposedly what awarded me the "SAFE" marking.



Here's the dealie: 

If you have a LINK or know the exact URL to my account (http://www.flickr.com/photos/14467890@N02/) you can see my stuff. If you go to flickr and check out the site, view people, search photos, search people, search for me or my photos, you don't get squat. i'm invisible unless you specifically go to my photostream via direct URL. 

So, sum of all parts is: censorship. They don't want the public to see my stuff because they acted against Stewart Butterfield's proclaimed "err on the side of caution," deleted my content without investigation or communication, (an act which i announced in my next image, using the flickr staff email as proof, which they then removed), and were embarassed. 

This isn't about what's good for the community. It's about what flickr staff feels is good for them; the way the flickr users and the outside world perceives them. i'm a danger to no one except flickr staff's egos and public image. 

They are apparently not fans of "let the truth speak for itself."