A little disappointed in Metafandom...

[gaudinight]

Of course when Hth’s rant about the entitlement of SGA’s McShep fans hit the airwaves, I wanted to see the original post which prompted the rant.  I thought it was interesting that Metafandom linked to Hth’s post when the rant was based on an unsourced original post.

Metafandom is great so I’m not being critical of it as a whole. But occasionally

Comments

[cathexys]

It seems to me there are two things you're objecting two:

(1) You suggest that Metafandom's purpose is to "disseminate substantive meta." The fact is, however, that the community has never defined itself as such. Here's the user info description: This community is for linking to interesting discussions in fandom, any fandom, on LiveJournal. I was the one who memoried the post, and if I'm sorry about anything, it's for putting Hth into the spotlight like that, but I'm certainly not sorry for putting a post in that offered an "interesting discussion

[gaudinight]

In my opinion, so much of her post was dependent on her paraphrase of the original post and many people who responded to her post were commenting based on her characterization of the post that it detracted significantly I think from the "interestingness" of the discussion as a larger discussion of fannish entitlement

[cathexys]

But that still presupposes that the post *was* heavily dependent on the post she references, which I contend it wasn't. In fact, just skimming the first 20 or so comments, most did not even reference the post but rather responded to Hth's actual point which took off from but was not limited to this one specific instance of unnamed rage

[gaudinight]

I think we see things differently. I saw lots of people responding specifically to her characterization of the original post. And huge number of the comments were discussing whether or not there was a group of "McShep Assholes" in SGA fandom and who they were. People were giving the original post as an example of the terrible behavior of McShep fans. It wasn't tangential. She gave this as an example. If it isn't example then what is

[gaudinight]

In general I do find Metafandom wonderful too. Just not in this case. I'm not angsting about it, I just think it was a mistake for that post to be linked.

The mods do chose what goes in and what doesn't. The mods do make judgments. That's why I read Metafandom so I don't have to go looking for interesting discussions.

You can say there are no rules and it's all for fun and deflect the critique as if the judgment of the mods doesn't matter... you can say the readers decide.... But the mods' judgments do matter and have impact on the wider discussion. The mods privilege some discussions as interesting and not others.

[gaudinight]

:) Right. I'm not saying my opinion/judgment is more or less valid than yours. I think we're cool here. I wasn't sharing this viewpoint because I expect you to change your rules, at all. Or that you are terrible people. I think you are great to do this. It was just a critique about this particular link. You don't owe me anything. If fact, you don't even really owe me an explanation so I appreciate the fact that you are discussing it with me. And I'm not angsting or going delete my LJ in a fit of pique. I don't feel oppressed or entitled

[zing_och]

I'm pretty sure that the original post was never locked. The poster doesn't have me friended, and I remember reading it. So hth didn't reference a locked post, she just didn't want to reveal which post it was.