Why linkspam is an unsafe place for writers.

[merricatk]

So! A couple of weeks ago I posted my first in what will be an intermittent series of why I write slash. One comment I got was from , which, if you've never heard of them, is an "Anti-Oppression Linkspam Community." Their policy is to link to any posts they find-- Well, here, I'll let them speak for themselves

Comments

Linkspam

[broomstyx]

Holy crap. What a strange discussion. I've never heard of linkspam. Or fandom-wank or whatever

Re: Linkspam

[merricatk]

The bizarre thing is, it's not warnings on stories, it's warnings on meta topics.

And one thing I find very interesting about this mod's post: since she wasn't speaking for the community, there wasn't any way she was going to answer any criticism. It makes me wonder if she posted just so people could praise her (not that there's anything wrong with that, unless you happen to have a built-in I can't answer criticism).

And I know I owe you some replies! The weekend is coming, and I hope to get caught up. *g*

[dinpik]

Even one of their supporters said the editorializing titles wasn't cool. (Friended you, btw.)

[merricatk]

Friended you right back! (Also friended you on my "personal" LJ, carose59

[dharma_slut]

Yeah, I started protesting the warnings system, via comments in the linkspam posts, and then an open letter in my lj. http://dharma-slut.dreamwidth.org/89322.html
The mods, in fact, have taken the request seriously enough to start re-thinking their policies;
http://linkspam.dreamwidth.org/21259.html
http://linkspam.dreamwidth.org/21556.html

I would like to read what you had to say, merricat. Do you have an access list for your meta posts?

[merricatk]

I'm glad I'm not the only one!

And I've unlocked the post in question. It can be found at http://merricatk.livejournal.com/255294.html. Now all my meta is unlocked. *g*

[swordygardener]

even though included in the proper channels are private messages to individual mods. I'm confused as to why asking the question in a comment is different from asking it in a private post,

The difference is that a comment is visible to everyone, while a private post is not.

Linkspam has a history to hide facts they find inconvenient, and the answer to your question would fall under that, because I do not think people would have liked it.

In one case, the Lambda debate, they outright lied because "the truth was biased", according to their poster. Get that. They pretend to be all anti oppression, but they only do it if it is oppression that affects them. Any other kind even gets defended by lies.

And as seen in your case, sometimes the power they think they have by maintaining their community is something they misuse to slam a point they dislike. YOur posting probably was something the linkspam person disliked, so they slammed it with derailing.

For no reason whatsoever. That's Linkspam for you.

[tree]

the "they" in the Lambda debate was a single individual, who is no longer involved in linkspam. linkspam is now maintained by a group of -- i think five? or six? people, who make decisions based on consensus through discussion.

[merricatk]

Thank you for clarifying that; it's good to know the facts.

[merricatk]

The truth was biased.

George Orwell would steal that, if he were still alive.

And I'm thinking Linkspam's motto is, "The best defense is a good offense."

Thank you for commenting. It really helps.

[boogieshoes]

i'm here via metafandom, and although this has never come up for me, i can see where it is highly irritating to have this double-standard re the importance of what you're writing being applied. and other things.

you have my sympathy, here.

-bs

[merricatk]

Thank you so much. That really means a lot. And welcome!