?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The Gauntlet

Someone has left me a message. I'm touched. 

Er, friends, if you don't want to see a rant and a huge donnybrook, you might want to skip this.

 Why, yes, I actually would like to explain this, but I'll have to do it here.  I've always preferred a stand-up fight to a bug hunt, but I'll make my stand in my own space if there is no other alternative.

The difference between the Master and the Hall Monitor is that the Master flames once and goes on his way. This is not very nice of him but nothing personal. His flames are so general and over the top as to be easily dismissed. The Master is also very funny at times.

The Hall Monitor, on the other hand, submits a personalized review (sometimes multiple reviews) in which she threatens novice writers with loss of their accounts and will do the reporting herself if a minor infraction is found. The Hall Monitor then provokes further drama by directing her victims to her own forum, where they must show suitable contrition (learning how to write in a Hall Monitor-approved way -- their portion of the Humble Pie) before being released from her version of the Naughty Stool. Those who do not have their PM responses reproduced for the amusement of all and are labeled trolls. This is not funny at all. And this is why the Hall Monitor's attitude of mean-spirited condescension has come to be like fingernails on a blackboard. I daresay I'm not alone in this.

I do not see where, in any of the examples I am asked to explain, anyone told an author to take a story down or threatened to report said author. Does that suffice? 
As long as we are in the mood for explaining contradictions, I have a few of my own that puzzle me.   Perhaps the Hall Monitor would be so kind?

 On the subject of fit content for forum posts we have this:

X-Box: Topic: Rape - a fit subject for fiction?

This is such a controversial subject that I forbid it to be mentioned on Can We Talk? #1 Wendwriter


and this

Can We Talk: All Are Welcome:

Secondly, she is a survivor of a massacre, and apparently of gang rape, though this is not made entirely clear. I don't know if you know any rape victims - I know a few. That stupid Sue doesn't act like one. I will NEVER tolerate any fic that either minimises or belittles the horror of such a crime. There is not a "set" way to respond to the trauma thereof; each person responds differently, but one thing they don't do is simply get up and carry on as if nothing happened. There would be internal injuries (the severity depending on the amount of force used. I could tell you some very gruesome, entirely true stories by PM if you wanted me to.), shame issues and a state of shock. The result would be that she would be limping, terrified of males, and confused - possibly unable to speak. If she had been unconscious during the event, she would be upset because there would be a simultaneous desire to know what exactly happened and to block it out. (. . .) If she has been sexually abused, where are the tears, flashbacks, irrational fits of rage and panic attacks? Where is the compulsive washing and sense of overwhelming shame? Where are the injuries? A few scratches on her belly? I think not. Difficulty walking due to internal bruising, wrenched upper thigh muscles, bruises and scratches all over her torso and swelling wherever those are. Depending on how perverted the attackers were, I could get seriously gruesome here, but I'll spare you the details... There are young readers here after all.

My take on rape - only if it's absolutely necessary, and not because you're too dratted lazy to come up with a decent idea. The event itself should not be graphic, and the aftermath should be properly detailed, so that the event is in no way glamourised or used to titillate the audience. I HATE those stories where it's used to entertain. Yuk!!
#63 Jul 31, poster: Wendwriter 


Note: I read the story in question before the author took it down. In no way did it glamorize or titillate.  It was not even made clear the OC had been molested. The OC's only offense was heading toward a romance with Haldir. 

I see a contradiction there, don't you?

Compare that with the post that had me threatened with blocking for speaking of 'adult' themes in front of the kids and decide if someone has a poor memory about her 'clearly stated boundaries. '

On the subject of author alerts we have this in which I am asked, "Erm, why have *you* got me on author alerts, then, mate? Only my stories will show up on that. Just askin'..." and  "In fact, the only time I do is when some berk decides to annoy me with a revenge flame on behalf of a Suethor or troll, or by posting unwanted comments on my e-spaces. Or by putting me on Author Alerts when he has clearly stated that he doesn't like my work. That's a bit strange..."


and

"Sinner: Teraphmure

Sin: Revenge flame on my story, "Stolen" on a new account because she doesn't have the guts to be honest either about her writing or about who she is. She's so obviously a Suethor it's ridiculous - since she can't find any actual fault in my writing - the purpose of leaving my stories up.
Sucked...

Quote: Your obviously new to this whole "Writing" thing.

Tip: Stop Embarrassing yourself. End quote


Comment: Have put this account on alert so I'll know if she posts any stories on it. What fun: she now has an account she can only use for communication - unless she blocks PMs. Titter! PWNed on every level.
Sin Bin #14 Aug 10 Wendwriter"


and

" . . . Comment: People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Sigh! So everybody hates me. Boo hoo! Wait a minute - I have a popular forum and PM buddies and whatnot. Maybe "everybody" doesn't hate me after all. Added this toerag to my author alerts list. Hee Hee! Sings: Stupid girl...
Sin Bin #32 Sep 13 4:17 PM edited Sep 14 3:46 PM Wendwriter"
 

She liked their work?  Could've fooled me!

Note: The Hall Monitor isn't the only one who can put a toerag person of interest on Author Alert.  Sauce for the goose, I say.



  



Comments

( 22 comments — Leave a comment )
nierielraina
Oct. 25th, 2007 05:00 am (UTC)
Randy, Randy, Randy.... *pats Elvenking on the back* You have my sympathies...

Lady Nieriel
randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 01:08 am (UTC)
Thank you, Lady Nieriel, and never fear -- I am not about to do a meltdown. I'm just a might irked, is all. LOL
nierielraina
Oct. 27th, 2007 01:32 am (UTC)
*hands over a goblet of Dorwinion*
Gee...I can't imagine why! I mean it just goes on and on and on and on... and some people talk about unreasonable people? *rolls eyes*

Love that avatar btw.

Lady Nieriel

randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 02:19 am (UTC)
Downs it, along with a Xanax
Thank you.

Love that avatar btw.

Yes, just a little snaphot of home, looking east. Charming, isn't it? :)
nierielraina
Oct. 27th, 2007 02:51 am (UTC)
Re: Downs it, along with a Xanax
You're welcome. And yes, quite scenic!

I sent you something by email that I think you will really find amusing and theraputic... *g* Very Randy in nature... LOL!

Lady Nieriel
crowdaughter
Oct. 25th, 2007 07:16 am (UTC)
I do not see where, in any of the examples I am asked to explain, anyone told an author to take a story down or threatened to report said author. Does that suffice?

As one of the examples quoted in the linked post, I would ditto that.

The Hall Monitor then provokes further drama by directing her victims to her own forum, where they must show suitable contrition (learning how to write in a Hall Monitor-approved way -- their portion of the Humble Pie) before being released from her version of the Naughty Stool.

And I am always puzzled how much this modus operandi reminds me of a certain way to teach "Defense Against The Dark Art" in a ministry-of-magic-approved way in classes by Professor Umbridge in the Harry Potter Universe - who will sack all teachers who do not abide to her ministry-approved ideas if she finds the slightest possibility to do so, and thrives and gloats about the feeling of power that this is giving her. The only difference is that this is happening in reality, and the Hall Monitor has no ministry of magic, or any other authority to give her the title of "High Inquisitor", behind her.
ignoblebard
Oct. 26th, 2007 01:07 am (UTC)
Wow, the sound of crickets from a certain quarter is deafening today. I guess the sweets from the pinata weren't so tasty after all.

It will be interesting to see what gets pruned next, but it doesn't really matter. Thank goodness for copy/paste I always say.

The anaology to Delores Umbridge is spot on as well. :-)
randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 01:41 am (UTC)
Wow, the sound of crickets from a certain quarter is deafening today.

Hark! I have just heard trumpets from the east! You spoke too soon, Bard.

It will be interesting to see what gets pruned next, but it doesn't really matter. Thank goodness for copy/paste I always say.

That pinata had a pile of dirty linen in it, and there's more where that came from.
maiafay
Oct. 26th, 2007 03:42 am (UTC)
....

I'm not getting in the middle of this, but I think things have been blown way out of proportion (as they have a tendency to do when friends/acquaintances fight). As for the rape issue...well, I write BSDM fics, and like non-con in a fantasy setting. I do not support it in RL, nor would I. But even in RL I would be a bit more...adventurous with any lover I take because I like that sort of thing. It's just the way I'm built and it will come out in my writing. *shrugs* I just decided to not ignore Wendy's stance on the issue--but to just accept we won't stand on common ground on it. I just looked beyond for things we do have in common.

But for the record, I think anything goes in fiction and should not be barred all because it offends.

*sigh* I think I went off topic.
randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 01:58 am (UTC)
I'm not getting in the middle of this,

I quite understand. I can't say as I'm enjoying being in the middle of this myself.

But for the record, I think anything goes in fiction and should not be barred all because it offends.

Oddly enough, it was a remark to that effect that got me into trouble in the first place. I think Wendy and I could have continued on cordial terms had I simply learned not to challenge or contradict her.

*sigh* I think I went off topic.

There is no such thing as 'off topic' here. Any discussion is welcome.
maiafay
Oct. 27th, 2007 03:55 am (UTC)
Well, she read what I said here and was fine with it...she posted a commentary on her journal regarding our different opinions. I went ranting on the one thread ( I call it anything I post more than 200 words ranting) in the Can We Talk? forum about the non-con and she held up the white flag at the end of the discussion. And I'm not bragging about that because I technically didn't "win"...I'm just saying we agreed to disagree and that was that.

What happened exactly? No one will tell me!
randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 04:48 am (UTC)
What happened exactly? No one will tell me!

Oh, it was a wonderful wank. The details (some of them) are to be found in my post of 28 September, 2007, entitled, "Oh Dear . . ." The rest of it, you will find at Wendy's lj. I've linked one of them, the rest follow.

To make a long story short, Wendy made a comment at that same thread in Can We Talk that you had posted in about non-con. To the effect that certain subjects should never be written about as entertainment. I replied 'But . . .' and cited William Faulkner as an example of a respected author who had written about rape in a non-PC way. He certainly cannot be accused of not doing his research. I said that sometimes the subject is handled not as entertainment, but to be thought-provoking.

A further discussion ensued. I did not take part, because I was gone for the day. My next post, the following morning was my last. Wendy rather went off on me. I decided that Can We Talk was not the forum for me, and I would have gone quietly away, had I not seen a rant on Wendy's Live Journal two days later in which Aislynn Crowdaughter and I were compared to Fred and Rose West. I'm afraid I took offense at that, and the rest is history.

For the record, I had no idea that the very subject of rape was taboo in Can We Talk. It had been discussed before, by Wendy herself.

There was a discussion at Wendy's lj in which she apologised but then pressed the two of us to eat our own share of the Humble Pie. I was disinclined to do this, and to join in her new forum, for I felt it was only a matter of time before I unwittingly tresspassed on Wendy's tender sensibilities again. It was that discussion that led to my sudden banning from both fora and being blocked from all communication, both private and public with her.

So there you have it. I doubt you have the time to track down and sift through all the posts, but they bear me out. This rift was not over a difference of opinion, but rather about Wendy's behavior.
ignoblebard
Oct. 27th, 2007 02:05 am (UTC)
You know, it's hard to blow something out of proportion when one person isn't talking. If you'll check a previous post you'll see how a certain someone didn't post anything for two weeks after the initial "discussion". Two weeks of remarks about piñatas, trolls, and disagreeable people. In fact, if anyone checks the chronology here, the original "discussion" was the result of a certain someone posting to lj goading the people involved to respond. As soon he they did, they were summarily blocked, and then taunted from the safety of a place they were no longer allowed to enter. IMO Mr. O. has shown remarkable restraint and discretion in refusing to respond to those posts until asked a direct question by the person in question. He has, from the beginning, been reluctant to stoop to calling out this person in public on their spitefulness and hypocrisy. But hey, you ask a question you're not always going to like the answer.

Live and let live has always been my motto. Agree to disagree? I can go for that too. Anyone who knows me knows I'm not the type to go around picking fights and/or getting involved in other people's battles.

However, if a person feels that agreeing to disagree is how to get along, in life or on the internet, then why do they devote their time to tearing other people down, threatening them, and posting their gloating little rants in a blog or forum? Is that agreeing to disagree? Is that showing a person civility? Is civility too much to ask from people these days even when there can be no respect?

I've been reading this stuff from the outside, and what is painfully clear is that agreeing to disagree is not a courtesy certain people appear to feel they owe others. I seem to recall a little thing called the golden rule as well, treating people as one would like to be treated. Old fashioned nowadays, what with the level to which discourse has sunk in every venue from politics to the internet I suppose.

I see some people seem to think that being treated as an equal is important. That would be an equal to whom exactly? It looks like when it comes to fanfiction, some animals are more equal than others. Should those who write certain types of stories or write about certain subjects be held up to ridicule because they work at different levels of writing skill and experience? And who is to judge?

Maiafay posted quite a cogent antiflaming argument at one time, the gist of which, IIRC, was that few fanfiction writers are professionals in the field of writing or have any background or much education in writing so why are some people so hot to tell others what they are doing is wrong?

I guess my point is that anyone who expects to be treated with a certain level of respect, sensitivity, and civility had better be damned sure they are willing to extend the same courtesy to others.

One last bit: Telling people to post what they want and then deleting their comments because you don't agree with them, saying you will never block people and then blocking them when they are besting you in a debate, castigating "suethors" for having the temerity to pull and repost stories to get rid of flames and then pulling and reposting a story of theirs that has been flamed, comparing people to infamous serial murderers, apologizing, and then ranting on your journal about how "insensitive" other people are, does not exactly look like agreeing to disagree is in this person's repertoire.

And yes, what is it with people who don't or won't reason? That gripes me too. :-)
maiafay
Oct. 27th, 2007 04:25 am (UTC)
I was just making a general statement because I still really don't know what's going on. I was PMed by Randy, out of the blue, and while I don't mind per se...I was confused over what drama caused this.

And by your comments, I'm assuming you read her comments to me on her journal...which I have no control over. As I said, I feel tugging on my arms now from both sides.

I practice what I preach for the most part. I'm not perfect, and I can be pretty nasty and intimidating when I wish( the Jesus is hawt bitch fest on AFF comes to mind)...and I know HOW to hurt authors/artists in the worst ways. I've done it, I know others have seen it (my readers and friends are a little leery of picking a fight), and while I'm not proud of it--I can say I take what I dish out.

I've had some intense disagreements in the past with people, but I can constructively argue (or not in some cases) and meet them word for word with no fear of "losing". I can admit when I'm wrong and apologize to even the most anal of opponants (Randy, remember the Aquarians? Wolfy comes to mind...)

It's just the way I am. I'm very aggressive; those that poke me will get a poke back; and those that poke back when I poke first...well, that's fine with me. It doesn't matter where the jab comes from or the reason...I will resolve the issue or agree to disagree.

This is just me, though, not all people have that fortitude or desire to debate longterm. For the record, I think the blocking was a bit much...and opinions should be heard. But, it's not my forum, nor do I know all the motivations behind the action. But I know I was extremely frustrated with those Aquarians when they blocked half of FF.net. It's like someone hanging up in the middle of a heated argument. Nothing irritates me more.

Again, I'm feeling useless here, because even though I tried to give a neutral opinion, nothing is being resolved. :(
randy_o
Oct. 27th, 2007 05:00 am (UTC)
It's like someone hanging up in the middle of a heated argument. Nothing irritates me more.

And that is precisely what Wendwriter did to me. She made a provocative comment in her Live Journal, pushed me for an answer whn I protested I was taking time to cool down, and then deleted and blocked me when I had made my point. I saw red. I'm not proud of it.

I'm not perfect, and I can be pretty nasty and intimidating when I wish( the Jesus is hawt bitch fest on AFF comes to mind)...and I know HOW to hurt authors/artists in the worst ways. I've done it, I know others have seen it

LOL. I'm sure Aislynn can tell you I've had my moments at AFF.net. It's how we met. The difference is, I learned to be more tolerant, and I had hoped Wendy might come to do the same, which is why I participated in Can We Talk.

Again, I'm feeling useless here, because even though I tried to give a neutral opinion, nothing is being resolved. :(

A neutral opinion is welcome. I think Bard is more frustrated with Wendy than with you.
ignoblebard
Oct. 27th, 2007 05:57 am (UTC)
To me, the difference really lies in those who can dish it out and take it and those who cannot. Obviously, you can. I've read some of your choice comments. You're articulate and thoughtful. I don't want you to feel in the middle of anything. I only responded to your comments about agreeing to disagree because I think flaming is wrong on principle, and the comments Randy quoted from the person in question: "now she has an account she can only use for communication" really got up my nose. What gives anyone the right to be so hateful?

A spirited debate is always a good thing. It can be both fun and a learning experience what with the give and take on both sides. But if your intention is not to debate but argue, then what's the point? And if your intention is to close a topic, saying something like "Shut this down now. This is not a fit topic for discussion here" should be enough for any reasonable person. But don't start something and then get all creamy because people can't read your mind.

Now you'd never know any of this from reading the forum or lj because there was some modification involved. And the person did apologize - every day and at length - until she "scared up a response". At which time all discussion was cut off when the "offended parties" replied reasonably but without the proper hat in hand "sorry we didn't take your feelings into account" comments. It appeared that the apology was only a ruse to draw the parties out so they could get another whack from the teacher's ruler.

I know you don't shy away from debates or disagreements, and I respect that. Ever hear the expression "disagree without being disagreeable"? Some people haven't learned that art, and I can understand that and let it go for the most part, though at times I tend to get disagreeable in those situations myself. What I do not respect are bullies, and one who puts people's stories in a "sin bin" and makes them beg for forgiveness is just that. Add to that the fact that ff.net is rife with teens and inexperienced authors looking for a little "on the job training" and some of that stuff gets pretty ugly, and to no good purpose. I have always said that people aren't looking for advice, they are looking for validation. Does it hurt to give them a little once in awhile, to dial down the vitriol a little for the sake of a sense of community?

I have a whole other off topic rant going in my mind here so I'll just leave off. But as to this situation I'll only say that it is more than a simple disagreement on what topics should or should not be open for debate.
crowdaughter
Oct. 27th, 2007 12:36 pm (UTC)
I was just making a general statement because I still really don't know what's going on. I was PMed by Randy, out of the blue, and while I don't mind per se...I was confused over what drama caused this.

And by your comments, I'm assuming you read her comments to me on her journal...which I have no control over. As I said, I feel tugging on my arms now from both sides.


Mayafay, sorry! I would not want you to get in the middle of this; it is my belief that when an argument between acquaintances takes place, all involved parties ought to respect the ties any third party might have to both of them. I appreciate my ties to you, and I respect your ties to Wendy.

I did not respond to your first post here for that very reason, for fear of ending up ranting about Wendy. I will certainly not ask you to take sides; I do respect you greatly. It is only that I fear there is a lot of angry arguing pent up in me, at the moment, that would be better directed at the party who it belongs to; and you had the unfortunate pleasure to ask what happened. Which is, in such a situation, always akin to open a pent up steam vale...

Sorry again!

Aislynn
crowdaughter
Oct. 27th, 2007 09:27 pm (UTC)
always akin to open a pent up steam vale...

*headdesk* And that should read valve! Talk about spelling errors that make Merriam-Webster cry! Sigh...
crowdaughter
Oct. 27th, 2007 12:15 pm (UTC)
I see some people seem to think that being treated as an equal is important. That would be an equal to whom exactly? It looks like when it comes to fanfiction, some animals are more equal than others. Should those who write certain types of stories or write about certain subjects be held up to ridicule because they work at different levels of writing skill and experience? And who is to judge?

And that, in a nutshell, is what remains for me of this whole argument when all is said and done and we leave out the question who insulted whom and who ought to apologize to whom and in what way.

For the record, I have no problem with agreeing to disagree and respecting peoples different opinions; but I am perfectly capable of flying off the handle like the next incensed teenager when I feel that someone goads me into a discussion by practically begging me to forgive any insults and come back, only to then when I do reenter discussion and say I will think about accepting the offer to come back, telling me I ought to apologize to them and realize how much I have insuled them by ever daring to disagree or to dioscuss a certain subject in the first place, and by the way, regarding the offer to come back, I should pretty please remember that they wore a chainsaw. Not to mention if those same people later gloat how they pushed my buttons and revealed me as an attention seeker obsessing about my intended victim. Er. I daresay, even the most peaceful and friendly people will tend to be incensed if they are treated like that, and I am *not* one of the most peaceful and friendly of people to begin with.

But even if I leave all that "Aislynn is angry because somebody pulled a number on her" issues out, when all is said and dome I still have issues with Wendwriters attitude in regard to fledgling writers and especially with her reporting Jihad.

I feel that there is a world of difference between spoking someone's badfic on a forum, or leaving an not-too-friendly review that tells someone "your story does not work, because of this and trghat, your OC does not come over believable for these and these reasons, and by the way, could you please at least make yourself familiar with the canon you ignore, before you have your wicked way with it? Because at least then you will know what you are doing!"

- or telling somebody to take their story down, threaten them with reporting them for any breach of the TOS that will give an excuse to do so (even spelling errors, or quotations of a song within the story), and gloating about the power that gives the reporting person in a public forum. Where the stories of those who will not cow are linked for other users of the forum who are encouraged to go flame them.

This is different like finding one's story spoked at fanficrants, or at deleterius /and I had the latter, so I can talk). It is different to receiving an over the top flame. It is something that goes viscerally against all my beliefs. Fanfiction exists in a legally grey area to begin with. It depends on the tolerance of the copyright holders and their willingness to look very hard then other way. On the other hand, we have seen increasing intolerant puritan witch hunts (like warriors for innocence, and the like) and attempts to expel certain subjects from being shown or written about here on lj and generally on the web. In such a situation, somebody setting up their own little reporting Jihad is exactly something we do *not* need. IMHO.

Aislynn (with apologies to Randy for spamming his lj with this very long rant).


randy_o
Oct. 28th, 2007 12:00 am (UTC)
(with apologies to Randy for spamming his lj with this very long rant).

Au contraire, Mistress Aislynn; you say something that needed to be said. I am rather pleased with the calibre of this discussion, and the variety of the replies, Maiafay's included.

I don't see spam -- I see a really good debate, which is my aim here.
nierielraina
Oct. 27th, 2007 02:58 am (UTC)
Bard, I'm always amazed at your clarity of thought. Well said.

Lady Nieriel
ignoblebard
Oct. 27th, 2007 03:20 am (UTC)
Thanks, Lady Nieriel. It seems there are a few things I still get passionate about.
( 22 comments — Leave a comment )