Modes of Control

Filtering: EF Admin exercises the right to filter content that breaches any of the three documents users agree to abide by when they create an account. Ethical considerations regarding filtering include over breadth, under breadth, time, and medical decisions made by non-professionals.
Filtering always has the possibility to accidentally allow items that should not be included (under breadth) or exclude items that should be included (over breadth). In this case, posting of photos has been delayed until individually approved by site admin. This also creates a concern for time. Timeliness of posting photos has been outweighed by necessary protection for the community in a balancing test comparable to the ad hoc balancing test. The value of the image’s content is weighed against the possible harm it could produce- or the interest in making the photo public to members versus keeping it from members.
One final ethical thought to consider is who is making the decisions regarding filtering. If EF Admin is not a trained professional, how do they have the capacity to judge which images could invoke a seizure and which are safe. Allowing a person without a medical background to do this is of great concern to me. Especially when epilepsy in all its form is still very much an unknown; in fact that is the definition of epilepsy: two or more unexplained seizures.
Norms: eCommunities has established norms for members. They are best outlined in the Privacy Policy, Terms of Service, and Usage Agreement contracts. These documents combined with the precedent of member action establish what is right and wrong in the community.
The invasive photos clearly violated not only the established community norms, but EF was able to take action because of the Usage Agreement all members agree to upon creating their accounts.
Participation: This site was built for members and is run on member-generated content and interactions. Members also alerted EF Admin to the invasive content. This site is deeply rooted in participation.
Pressure: Reactions (both emotional and potentially physical) prompted EF Admin to remove the invasive content. Extreme possible consequences force ER to closely moderate the site to protect its members. If they community is one that can be easily infiltrated, it will loose its credibility and members will move elsewhere.
Liability: EF is not liable for content as an internet host. Ning is also not liable for content. Under the bookstore model, which includes internet hosts, EF cannot be held accountable for their content as they do not exercise complete control over what is written and/or posted.Liability has the potential to make the site a lot safer. If EF were help responsible for all content, it can be assured no harmful images would ever be posted, as a large legal suit would likely be filed. Using liability as a mode of control for site content would protect users, but would increase the likelihood of over breadth filtering.