Meta on AO3: Get it while you can.

Jul 11, 2012 08:28

I just got an email from AO3 - because my meta was reported by an unhappy Sherlock fan, the AO3 team had to review it, and they seem to have decided that they want to be a fanfiction-only site and that I have to remove it.

So, to anyone who hasn't downloaded my Study in Pink rewatch yet, and wants to. You have ~16 hours before I delete it. It is ( Read more... )

i don't have a tag for this

Leave a comment

hells_half_acre July 11 2012, 16:16:18 UTC
Yeah, it's hard thing to navigate when you start to decide what constitutes a "fanwork" and what doesn't.

I do it too though...I hate it when people call their reaction/review posts "meta" (which is why I don't label my "Quick Reaction" posts as meta). That's not an indepth study of the episode/character/theme, that's just an emotional response and ungathered thoughts.

I was even loathe to call my rewatches meta. You may notice that none of my SPN rewatches are tagged "meta", because I still don't think I'm talking about the show indepthly enough to deserve that label.

With my Study in Pink rewatch sitting at over 14,000 words though, I decided that it was less of a "reaction" and more of a "meta on character motivations and personalities as revealed in A Study in Pink plus general thoughts on the adaptation" (I just went with a shorter title :P)

So yeah, if I ran a meta site, I'd be constantly seeing people post things there that I didn't believe were "proper meta"...but then whether I asked them to take it down or not is another question, I suppose. I mean, I can't really get mad at people for defining "meta" differently than I do, just like I can't get made at AO3 if they don't see meta as being a "fanwork". FYI: This is the part of the TOS they quoted me:

Our Terms of Service, Section IV, part H, state in part:
H. Illegal and inappropriate content:
The Archive of Our Own is a place for fanworks… Content may not be uploaded to OTW’s servers if it …consists entirely of actual instruction manuals, technical data, recipes, or other non-fanwork content, including non-fanwork creative work. Uploading such content is a violation of the ToS.
(Emphasis is theirs)

Reply

sgmajorshipper July 11 2012, 16:34:20 UTC
I think, for me, it's not so much meta or not meta, but different kinds of meta. Quick reaction meta, arc meta, character meta, relationship meta, etc. which would then give you a way to sort and organize meta of different kinds, y'know? In-depth vs. off the top of your head stuff. Some people go looking for just episode reactions and thoughts, and they could find theirs through that group. I sucks that there's all these places for fanfic and fanart, but so few forums for critical thought, y'know?

I hate that fanwork and non-fanwork are such broad categories. They get to decide what's a fanwork and which kinds of fanworks they'll allow...and for a group that touts openness and an interest in fans and their creations, it's just really disappointing to me. I'm very invested in things like OTW and Dreamwidth, things that open doors, so it's a big deal for me when I see either limiting their services and what can be posted.

Reply

hells_half_acre July 11 2012, 16:40:10 UTC
Yeah, it's really a shame that meta doesn't have a good host anywhere out there. I agree with everything you just said.

Also, good idea with the different types of meta! Haha, I had never thought of that. *now I feel kind of ridiculously stupid*

Reply

elliemurasaki July 11 2012, 16:37:38 UTC
http://archiveofourown.org/tags/Original%20Work/works

Evidence suggests that this is a CANONICAL FUCKING TAG. With fourteen hundred works.

Reply

hells_half_acre July 11 2012, 16:41:56 UTC
I know! That's why I thought I could put it up!

But whatever. *shrug* It's not worth arguing about, at least, not for me anyway.

Reply

sgmajorshipper July 11 2012, 16:46:46 UTC
They really need to get their shit straight.

Reply

hells_half_acre July 12 2012, 08:10:26 UTC
Hey, just wanted to say that there's been an update - I've updated the post. The team captain type person apologized and reiterated that meta was still under discussion and that I could keep it posted until they come to a decision (unfortunately I'd already deleted it at that point.)

Reply

sgmajorshipper July 12 2012, 12:53:29 UTC
Oh, interesting. Keep us updated; as you might have guessed, it's pretty interesting to me. :)

ETA: Wow, what's it like to have started such a discourse about this stuff?

Reply

hells_half_acre July 12 2012, 16:04:33 UTC
It's kinda weird, to tell you the truth.

I mean, when I first got the angry comments from AO3 users, I was pissed off an up-in-arms about it. (But I think that was mainly the fault of the commenters tone - and also the fact that they really had no right to tell me how to use the site, since there was no mention that meta wasn't allowed in the TOS).

But, after writing to AO3 and receiving emails about it from them, I wasn't really angry anymore...I'm perfectly respectful of whatever decision they come to. It's their site and their decision, and I CAN see the argument for not allowing meta just as much as I can see the argument for allowing it.

So, it feels sort of funny to have started the discourse even though I'm not rage-shouting about it. Usually this sort of discourse is started by people who are much angrier than I am. :P

Anyway, I will keep you updated! :)

Reply

hells_half_acre July 12 2012, 05:31:58 UTC
elliemurasaki July 12 2012, 05:37:56 UTC
Maybe I'm fundamentally misunderstanding something, but it seems to me that for something to be a fanwork, it must be associated with at least one piece of art that somebody else created. Of the first twenty works on that tag, fourteen are not so associated (that is, 'Original Work' is the only thing under 'Fandom').

Reply

anatsuno July 12 2012, 05:51:45 UTC
You might not be convinced, but this thread might help grasp how it comes about.

http://fail-fandomanon.livejournal.com/37106.html?thread=165792498#t165792498

Reply

elliemurasaki July 11 2012, 16:37:57 UTC
"Your comment has been added. According to this journal's settings, it was marked as spam."

The fuck?

Reply

hells_half_acre July 11 2012, 16:43:19 UTC
Ugh, yeah, my LJ's been doing that to anyone who puts a link in their comment. I have no idea why. I just have to reply to it and they'll unmark it as spam, but it's super annoying.

Maybe when I have time later, I'll see if there's a setting somewhere that I can change. It's not like I get much spam here that I have to worry about.

Reply

turlough July 12 2012, 17:34:22 UTC
(Here through http://unofficialotwnews.tumblr.com )

You can change that setting here - just uncheck the "Spam Protection" box. (The special section they're talking about is here in your Inbox.)

Reply

hells_half_acre July 12 2012, 17:53:15 UTC
Thanks! :)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up