(Untitled)

Mar 05, 2004 13:24

Note: UnFlocked on October 2, although all comments not be Heidi or Angua are screened. If your comment was screened, let me know if you want it unscreened

From LadyMaidMarian's LJ:
That's where most of this hatred started. When an H/Ger spoke it was GT speaking, but when an H/Her spoke it WASN'T FA speaking. Why is that?Perhaps it's because FA is ( Read more... )

feuds, wankiness within fandom

Leave a comment

Re: 3 of 4! angua9 March 8 2004, 15:47:39 UTC
They have been accused -- by you, I think -- of forging IP's to frame someone.

No, wasn't me. Was this another thing from last May/June?

Yes. The whole mscribe/clarabella thing/fermatojam/pottersginny. They perceived Praetorianguard's post (and their perception of your approval of it) as an accusation of lying. Because, of course, a truthful accusation cannot be libel! Many, many people, on those threads and elsewhere, mentioned the possibility (or downright accused them) of manipulating the screenshots to frame msscribe.

Actually, msscribe didn't accuse anyone in particular.

As I recall, she didn't, but everyone knew whom she meant, it was widely discussed, and many people seemed to believe it. That widespread perception is mentioned above on this thread by Ataniell.

But then again, I don't take F_W too seriously.

Well, I take it a little more seriously than you do. I've been wanked a couple of times, and I shrugged it off (as I'm sure you do), but some people - especially people who aren't used to the rough give and take of the fandom - find it very painful and distressing, especially when hundreds of hostile personal comments appear on their LJ. I know that Arabella (because of the unfortunate timing) and Perceval (because of her character) suffered distress when they were wanked by "Sporkify" over the incest thing.

Most of the former GTers tend to be the type to suffer distress when wanked, especially because it is pretty much the ONLY way the fandom interacts with them. And you know, think of it this way: When you post on a thread full of stinging insults, even if you don't say anything very bad, it FEELS like you're endorsing what the other people have said. For instance, in the Arabella wank, people said all kind of nasty (and untrue) things. Then, as I recall, you said something like ("I have less and less respect for her"). Not so bad in itself, but it could definitely be understood as implying that you endorse EVERYTHING negative said on the thread. I'm sure similar things have happened with your comments on GT. Honestly, I don't remember exactly what you've said and not said, but *I* definitely got the impression from your public comments that you disliked them and thought the worst of them, as a group. If I - who don't consider myself a GTer at all - thought that, I'm sure they did as well.

I am, actually, very very certain that Sporkify is, at least, *not* one of the FA mods that I'm friends with, because my friends knew that I'd been angsting over how to reply to Arabella's December post about appropriate content in fanfics, and thus, Sporkify would never have had to do an ETA to add in a mention of me into that wank. I did ask, yesterday, on our internal list, if anyone knew who SPorkify was, and nobody has any clue.

If I had *any* understanding of *what is was* that caused people, including *you* to think this, I think it would go a long way towards building bridges. And yes, I think I can be calm and objective enough to engage them in meaningful discourse. If there's any hope of having a meaningful discourse, it is worth it, to me, to try.

I came to a conclusion on my own as to who "Sporkify" is (from various circumstantial, stylistic and motivational evidence), and then I discovered that other people, including former-GTers and others, had come to the same conclusion. The person I suspect is definitely an FA Mod, but I don't know how close you are to that person, how much you talk to them, or whether you consider him or her to be a friend. The person is on your friends list, but you have a very large one. :p I definitely believe that you and your friends have been misled and manipulated by a very dishonest person among your... acquaintances at least, if not close friends.

Reply

Re: 4 of 4! angua9 March 8 2004, 15:50:10 UTC
I also believe that "Fandom_Scruples" was/is a sockpuppet designed to make the people on the "gold list" (such as myself) look bad, by associating us with ridiculous censorship ideas. The troublemaker takes an honest but unhostile difference of opinion and exaggerates it into something no sane person can tolerate, and then watches the flames and wank roll in.

You know, I SAID that you can stop the feuding, but I don't know if you can. I believe that you have a better chance than anybody, though. I have NO IDEA what Imogen may or may not have told people -- I've never heard anything about you from them. But the former-GTers I know are very bitter, and they honestly think that you and your friends and associates utterly despise them. You missed some BAD SHIT when you were out doing much more important things last year.

Every time someone uses the terms "crazy" or "insane" or "stupid" or "sickening" to describe a *group* (as versus an individual, where such description is based on firsthand observations or actual interactions), there's a problem.

I wholeheartedly and enthusiastically agree.

I consider myself an FAer (and I'm no H/Her, that's for sure!) AND an SQer, and I joined GT as well (though, honestly, I only did that during the Pottersginny debacle, to show I wasn't going along with that mob frenzy). I hate stereotypes and generalizations and mass put-downs.

One last thing: Heidi, I respect you for not holding grudges and for getting over things, but not everyone can do that. Some people are much more sensitive and thin-skinned, and they *remember* insults and criticisms. Like forever. You could go to a lot of effort to build bridges and still not succeed. I think even the effort would help, but I can't promise anything. I am speaking *about* the ex-GTers, but I can't speak *for* them. I only know two of them, after all.

Also, I can't emphasize enough how much I am speaking for MYSELF, and not, in the slightest, for SQ. I am not in A&Z's confidence, and I couldn't even begin to speak for them. I have never discussed any of this with either of them, or any SQ admin.

Another last thing: I'm planning another trip to Miami next week, exact dates still uncertain.

Now who's longwinded?

Reply

Re: 4 of 4! heidi8 March 18 2004, 06:53:10 UTC
I think you're right about Fandom_Scruples, but it's also possible that F_S was a regular user at SQ or an ex-regular at GT who had an overidealized view of what the site's mods/admins/friends-of were like, and got stung pretty badly by the fandom sentiment that F_S was, shall we say, overdoing it. I really do think F_S is a kid, in part because of the complete lack of knowledge of what an injunction is. But that's just me, and I realised with the whole Escape from Azkaban thing this week that I listen to people with a lawyer's ear, and when they say things like "WB's backing", I take that as meaning something legally-specific.

And given some of my conversations in the past week, I am not sure anyone *can* build a bridge, but it doesn't mean I won't try. If there is to be one, then the ex-Gts need to get over the persecution complex they have, and actually engage in dialogue with people who don't agree with them on 90% of the universe. That's a fundamenally necessary starting point, and I think it's possible, but I fear it's not likely.

I hope it'll happen. I hope some of them will show up for POA in NYC or Salem or some of the other fandom goings-on. I hope they enjoy the *fandom* and realise that F_W is not the fandom, not even a subset, but rather, most of the regulars there not even part of the wider HP fandom, much less any subset that pays attention to now-defunct sites. They snark about *everything*. I look at Chibimono, who just deleted her LJ because she was hurt by the comments (many of which really were deserved) on F_W about the Escape from Azkaban boondoggle; that's an overreaction and it empowers the regulars at F_W more than they deserve.

And all that being said... you up for lunch tomorrow or Saturday?

Reply

Re: 4 of 4! angua9 March 22 2004, 11:35:36 UTC
Couldn't handle this length restriction any more. Answered by e-mail, to your livejournal address.

Reply

Re: 4 of 4! heidi8 March 22 2004, 15:15:07 UTC
Wibble. Didn't get it; I checked both my boxes. Can you resend? And send it right to heidi@tandys.org?

Reply

Re: 3 of 4! heidi8 March 18 2004, 06:44:40 UTC
I know that Arabella (because of the unfortunate timing) and Perceval (because of her character) suffered distress when they were wanked by "Sporkify" over the incest thing.

I know. And I have tried a few times to talk with Arabella about it, but she's not replying to me, so I feel like I'm talking into the air. Sigh.

Most of the former GTers tend to be the type to suffer distress when wanked, especially because it is pretty much the ONLY way the fandom interacts with them.

But that's because they keep saying that they don't WANT to be a part of the fandom! When we started with Nimbus, I asked them if they wanted to host a banner, or have a thread where we could post the CFP and encourage presentations and stuff, and they said no. They lock their LJs to posts from anyone who isn't on their friends list. They used to ban people from posting on their site. They kicked Irina off completely. There's only so many times that people (read: the rest of the fandom) can get kicked before you really give up trying to extend a hand of friendship.

For instance, in the Arabella wank, people said all kind of nasty (and untrue) things. Then, as I recall, you said something like ("I have less and less respect for her").

No. I said no such thing. If you can find where, that would be great, but really, Angua, you keep remembering me being *involved* and *commenting* on things that I wasn't involved with and didn't comment on, or at least where I didn't say what you think I said. And I don't know how to deal with this.

*I* definitely got the impression from your public comments that you disliked them and thought the worst of them, as a group.

I dislike Imogen, because I know that she lied to her co-admins about Chryslin. I dislike Chryslin because I know that she lied to Imogen and others. I dislike kvader because he's lied about me, personally, when he should have/could have known better. Zat's about it. And really, can you blame me?

I came to a conclusion on my own as to who "Sporkify" is (from various circumstantial, stylistic and motivational evidence), and then I discovered that other people, including former-GTers and others, had come to the same conclusion. The person I suspect is definitely an FA Mod, but I don't know how close you are to that person, how much you talk to them, or whether you consider him or her to be a friend. The person is on your friends list, but you have a very large one. :p I definitely believe that you and your friends have been misled and manipulated by a very dishonest person among your... acquaintances at least, if not close friends.

Then tell me who it is. Because from what you've said here, for the life of me, I cannot guess. If you want to offlist it to me, feel free. But if you know there's a viper in my yard, don't you owe a little duty to me to tell me where it is, before I walk out and get nipped again?

To be honest, this week, I think it's even less likely that Sporkify is on my friends list, because there wasn't *anything* on F_W about the whole Escape from Azkaban thing - and anyone on my flist could've easily taken my comments about it from Monday and utilized it in an F_W post, without even citing to me.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up