Also, like... it's not like the point of this comm is to link to *Bad* (TM) stuff, or to link to stuff just to ridicule it?
This is a worthwhile point even though historically meta debates have led to controversies without anyone having posted something just to mock it - all that's required is reading someone's meta post via the newsletter and making your own post disagreeing and linking back which then appears in the next newsletter issue.
But this meta-debate scenario is not really the same thing as the kind of dogpiling scenarios engendered by Fandom Wank or - what was that ancient Mary Sue mocking community on LJ?, and doesn't provide the same sort of inherent motive to attack, I would think.
(In the metafandom troubles, wasn't the issue more people who were annoyed by influx of disagreeing comments even if those comments were made with basic attempts at civility? And I mean, I can sympathize with that, to a degree.)
no subject
Date: 2019-01-27 01:45 pm (UTC)This is a worthwhile point even though historically meta debates have led to controversies without anyone having posted something just to mock it - all that's required is reading someone's meta post via the newsletter and making your own post disagreeing and linking back which then appears in the next newsletter issue.
But this meta-debate scenario is not really the same thing as the kind of dogpiling scenarios engendered by Fandom Wank or - what was that ancient Mary Sue mocking community on LJ?, and doesn't provide the same sort of inherent motive to attack, I would think.
(In the metafandom troubles, wasn't the issue more people who were annoyed by influx of disagreeing comments even if those comments were made with basic attempts at civility? And I mean, I can sympathize with that, to a degree.)