rambling on methodsshusuApril 16 2007, 11:33:27 UTC
we cannot measure intent
Oh yes, I absolutely agree. I guess I should explain -- I've probably been misconstrued a bit in the past, on this -- what I do when on my regular flist-surfings is not only check my flist, which is a cross-section of multiple fandoms, I also check in on several communities and individuals who have large watch-flists. So it's like a very broad, shallow scraping off the top. The random element is off, my own perception is in play, but the sample size is generally much larger than the average reader's and I make this run every two or three days, for at least a year now. Grain of salt needed, but not entirely non-useful.
Taking the posts that people did publicly, in their own journal (since that really puts a foot in it, in terms of declaring position -- this is what they took home), there really was a preponderance of reactions that disturbed me. I've watched a lot of wank (and I use the term extremely loosely) unfold, and the ratios didn't fit a community that was taking it seriously and thinking of ways to *help*.
So, yeah, not intent -- patterns, though. I can't judge where an individual stands unless I question them directly; my discomfort stems from the cross-section I did get, and (entirely personally) the fact that the deep samples I got, the repeated comments I ran into, were often people on my own flist. My other check is the 'life cycle' of the conversation, which also did not match up well to other universally-discussed topics which, in SGA, generally have heated reactions in the first week and then peter off to cooler heads and some positive suggestions.
In any case, I generally don't comment on the vagaries of LJ unless I see a marked difference in patterns-- because who else would notice? The stats don't have a face, but I always try to bring it up just so people can see where they might be, relative to the mean. I just wasn't expecting to be one of the outliers; I thought it'd be the other way around. I'm concerned that most of fandom is just going to leave it be and declare it done, or tune out the people who want to move forward out of the 'awareness' phase.
Re: rambling on methodshederahelixApril 16 2007, 15:56:48 UTC
Okay, I still have nothing profound to say because of work, but *now* I know where I remember your name from. It's that icon which is fabulous!
I think your response above--the perusing of a very large sample of flists--is a really good way to give specific evidence that there was a pattern of response that played out a certain way.
And yes, the discussion did have far more staying power than many other topics. I'm wondering how much of that was this particular conversation (about race in SGA and particular trends) and how much was that fandom itself had been buidling toward a head on this topicc.
I mean, I'd been thinking about race in fandom almost since the very beginning. One of my RPS fandoms had a character who was Filipino and I was distrubed by the way that he got exoticized by a lot of writers. I said so, and people were like, no we're not. You know, the usual.
But it does seem like, at least in the circles I travel in, fandom as a whole has been having a more in-depth conversation about this than usual. I base this not on anything a quantitative scientist would approve of as methodology but on the fact that there have been panels on this--well attended panels that ran well past their allotted time, at each of the slash conventions I went to last year--BASCon, Escapade, and Con.Txt.
Oh yes, I absolutely agree. I guess I should explain -- I've probably been misconstrued a bit in the past, on this -- what I do when on my regular flist-surfings is not only check my flist, which is a cross-section of multiple fandoms, I also check in on several communities and individuals who have large watch-flists. So it's like a very broad, shallow scraping off the top. The random element is off, my own perception is in play, but the sample size is generally much larger than the average reader's and I make this run every two or three days, for at least a year now. Grain of salt needed, but not entirely non-useful.
Taking the posts that people did publicly, in their own journal (since that really puts a foot in it, in terms of declaring position -- this is what they took home), there really was a preponderance of reactions that disturbed me. I've watched a lot of wank (and I use the term extremely loosely) unfold, and the ratios didn't fit a community that was taking it seriously and thinking of ways to *help*.
So, yeah, not intent -- patterns, though. I can't judge where an individual stands unless I question them directly; my discomfort stems from the cross-section I did get, and (entirely personally) the fact that the deep samples I got, the repeated comments I ran into, were often people on my own flist. My other check is the 'life cycle' of the conversation, which also did not match up well to other universally-discussed topics which, in SGA, generally have heated reactions in the first week and then peter off to cooler heads and some positive suggestions.
In any case, I generally don't comment on the vagaries of LJ unless I see a marked difference in patterns-- because who else would notice? The stats don't have a face, but I always try to bring it up just so people can see where they might be, relative to the mean. I just wasn't expecting to be one of the outliers; I thought it'd be the other way around. I'm concerned that most of fandom is just going to leave it be and declare it done, or tune out the people who want to move forward out of the 'awareness' phase.
Reply
I think your response above--the perusing of a very large sample of flists--is a really good way to give specific evidence that there was a pattern of response that played out a certain way.
And yes, the discussion did have far more staying power than many other topics. I'm wondering how much of that was this particular conversation (about race in SGA and particular trends) and how much was that fandom itself had been buidling toward a head on this topicc.
I mean, I'd been thinking about race in fandom almost since the very beginning. One of my RPS fandoms had a character who was Filipino and I was distrubed by the way that he got exoticized by a lot of writers. I said so, and people were like, no we're not. You know, the usual.
But it does seem like, at least in the circles I travel in, fandom as a whole has been having a more in-depth conversation about this than usual. I base this not on anything a quantitative scientist would approve of as methodology but on the fact that there have been panels on this--well attended panels that ran well past their allotted time, at each of the slash conventions I went to last year--BASCon, Escapade, and Con.Txt.
Reply
Leave a comment