Hm.

[serai]

Hm. Hm. Hm.

Well, well. Seems some people have been rather high-handed lately about the inexperience of others. Sweet goddess, people, is it really so difficult to just point out a mistake and ask that it not occur again? Do you have to jump straight to the ugly insults and character assassination?

Man, this really makes me think twice about a couple of emails I was going to send out. Maybe I'm not quite as sorry about the conflicts I've had in the past as I thought I was. As more time goes by in my involvement with the internet, I grow increasingly puzzled and frustrated by how impossible it is to know how the hell to take people. One day they're nice, the next day they're tearing some poor newbie a new asshole because they can't be bothered to find out what's really going on.

But you know what? I started out acting on first impressions in this fandom, and that got me into hot water. Since then, I've tried hard to clamp down on that instinct, to say, "Oh, it must just be a bad day for that person." But I'm starting to think I was right in my initial judgements. Certainly this last bit of nastiness isn't doing anything to change my mind - if anything, it's getting me to rethink my constant struggle to turn the other cheek, whether on my own behalf or on others'. No, I'm not very good at it, but now I'm starting to think it's a wasted effort anyway, well done or not.

Comments

[semyaza.livejournal.com]

The only things I have any control over are how I act towards my friends, who those friends are, and what goes on in the posts and comments on my own journal. That doesn't mean that I always say the right thing--I know I don't--but I'm prepared to take responsibility for what I say. I may have an opinion on conflicts that don't concern me, as in the case of the one over the weekend, but I prefer to discreetly sit on my opinions. If something doesn't directly involve me, I leave it alone. More to the point, I try to make certain that it doesn't directly involve me.

Not only is it difficult to know how to take people when you can't see them face to face or haven't known them for a long time, but it's equally difficult, I think, to read a situation and only too easy to misunderstand what's being said or done. That's what happened to me with my comment about Orlando. It should have been obvious what I was saying, and yet it wasn't. I've become more cautious about what I say and more aware of the ways in which a statement or action may be misread.

I don't read Fandom Wank as much as I used to, but I sometimes find myself disagreeing with the wankers and agreeing with the wankee. If reactions to a situation are based on perception rather than facts, then who is right? I don't know.

[serai1.livejournal.com]

The situation over the weekend was a great illustration of the problems I see inherent in the "must post with fully detailed header, ratings, warnings, etc" mindset. It may be very convenient for the reader (may be - I find it irritating, myself), but it creates real problems for the writer. What if a fic isn't easily categorized, or completely loses its effect when it's boxed and labelled like that? The banner that was posted with that fic was clearly supposed to be part of the story, forming the inital impression that would lead the reader into the story. But when everybody's so used to the usual way of doing things, it sort of paves the way for that kind of reaction, doesn't it? Readers get very accustomed to writers behaving a certain way, and become rather intolerant of anything different.

I mean, didn't it occur to anyone that the reaction the banner brought up might have been part of the intended effect of the story? There've been times when I've been caught hook, line and sinker by a posting like that, but I didn't get all pissy and try to bite anybody's head off. I just laughed with relief when I found out it wasn't real. Hell, I'd hate to think what these people would've done if they'd been around when Welles' War of the Worlds was first broadcast.

[semyaza.livejournal.com]

I wonder what would have happened if the banner had been posted before the 'Breaking News' item.

[serai1.livejournal.com]

Hm, I was referring to the Breaking News item, as that looked more like a banner to me than the article that came after it. Unclear there, sorry!

[semyaza.livejournal.com]

Ah, I thought you must have meant the BN. It was behind a cut when I saw it, except for the first paragraph. It was the second one that altered the width of my friends display, but they were both banners, yeah.