dekedangle_rpfanon | #26 — Vanek! with a Jurco

#26 — Vanek! with a Jurco

This is the twenty-sixth post of Deke Dangle RPF Anon, a community for all your ice hockey anon meme needs.

THE RULES

1. Mods retain the right to delete, freeze, and/or screen threads and comments.
2. Meme rules do not require warnings.
3. Respect flock. Do not repost or share information from private tumblrs, locked twitter accounts, flocked LJ posts, etc.
4. No linking fans to their real life identities.
5. No looks bashing or body shaming. This applies to players and people associated with those players and their clubs, as well as fellow fans.
6. No embedded music.
7. No embedded images.
8. No spamming the meme, whether through repeated comments or other means.
9. No discussing trolling, individual trolls, or their efforts.

Meme rules do not require spoiler cuts. However, this layout does allow for them. Any of the following tags will create a spoiler cut when closed: <div cut>, <span cut>, <font cut>, <font color="white">

If you have any questions or concerns, please direct them to The Mod Post.

Threaded View
Flat View
Top-Level Comment View

Next post opens at 5,000 comments.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

There's a huge difference between "I didn't like X, Y, and Z" and constructive criticism. Maybe I didn't like the story because it didn't have flying ponies. Maybe I hated the top/bottom situation. Maybe the writing was too flowery, and I can't be arsed to explain what I mean by "too flower" or pull out examples.

Disliking authorial choices =/= constructive criticism. It's just dislike. And saying something was bad doesn't make that a constructive statement, even if it's true.

That's still more to work with than what's being complained about in this thread, since it started with not even knowing if it's their fic being talked about. I don't think anyone actually expects professional reviews, but having a single coherent thought about an established subject isn't really all that much to ask for.

having a single coherent thought about an established subject isn't really all that much to ask for.

A random reader on the internet does not owe you anything at all. No, not even a coherent thought. "I read this fic and it sucked" is a perfectly valid expression of feelings. I don't owe it to anyone to specify what fic I'm talking about - in fact, in non-anon circles, it'd usually be considered impolite.

... sure, anon, whatever. Enjoy being bizarrely rightous about your ability to provide shitty, shallow commentary. I roll my eyes whenever I see things identical to your "perfectly valid expression of feelings" in the fic discussion, as a reader, because it's pointless and doesn't add anything to the conversation. But, hey, that's your right! Be an unsubstantiated hater if that's all you want to offer.

nayrt but lol.

Personal twitter accounts don't exist to be providers of commentary or contributors to conversation for you. Something isn't "unsubstantiated" just because someone hasn't accompanied an expression of their opinion (not directed towards the author or a general readership!) with arguments, proof, and textual evidence. Why should someone annotate or commentate their feelings for your benefit when they aren't even talking to you? You are the one who seems bizarrely righteous about the world not revolving around you and your desires.

+1

This demand that readers provide constructive criticism if they dare say anything at all is a new level of entitlement. It ain't about you! If they wanted to talk about your fic to you, they would address their comments to you.

Has someone trashed your fic somewhere? Because you are taking this incredibly personally.

Someone trashes their fic so... comments without substance annoys them? Makes sense.

Honestly, the other anon isn't presenting themselves as a super fun person to interact with either. It's interesting seeing someone base their entire platform on them not being obligated to have good conversation habits, tho. A+ argument for yelling into the void in public.

Right, because reacting to someone else's OTT entitlement about how one should talk about one's feelings on twitter definitely = "basing their entire platform" on passive aggressive vagueblogging because they're not obligated to do anything else, nananana. No one has to enjoy reading put downs that might be about them, but this reaction from one particular anon is too much. It's not just one person on here who's saying so.

I dunno, I thought the anon who came in with the increasingly ridiculous defenses of why they're allowed to do what the initial vent was about was more OTT one. Like, sure, but they still sounded like a boring asshole to me, too.

I'm not sure what about "I don't owe you an explanation of my feelings when expressing those feelings on a platform that doesn't exist to cater to your readership" is so OTT. I wouldn't enjoy reading someone's twitter if it was filled with passive-agression and negative vagueblogging and subtweeting, and no one is saying that these are great, praiseworthy practices. But I also wouldn't march in complaining about how it's not to much to ask to demand they clarify who and what they're talking about and why, and calling someone an "unsubstantiated hater" because their personal twitter doesn't ~contribute to the conversation (what conversation lol? it's not a conversation, no one's talking to you). Explaining that this is ridiculously self-centered =/= "all I do online is tweet about how much I irrationally hate all these unspecified things." I only see one person (two, including you) calling others boring/unintelligent/shitty and shallow/etc... because they're trying to explain they don't owe it to strangers to produce #content on their personal twitters.

IDK how personal twitters even came into it, since the only medium mentioned by either of them is the fic discussion thread. Which is... generally ~conversation-based, IMO. And sure, there isn't a minimum amount of #content someone needs to put out, but if their philosophy across social media platforms is actually "I can and will say things with no context or support, and I don't have to be engaging while I'm at it because this a writer/reader interaction, no conversation wanted" - if we're in the business of ad absurdum -, it would've been a pretty quick unfollow for me there, too.

Er, because the entire thread is about how people talk about fic on their personal twitters? The subthread OP was talking about people vague tweeting fic? The only mention of the fic discussion thread was a stupid comparison (because that actually is a space that IS dedicated to discussion and also is not one person's personal platform) by OAA, who was using it as an opportunity to "roll their eyes" and expound upon how boring/terrible they thought a-they-rt was. Demanding that someone provide "context" or "support" for their personal tweets, which are not part of a conversation they are having with or for you, nor a "writer/reader interaction," is sheer entitlement. Unfollowing people because you don't enjoy their twitter is fine but also =/= demanding that they change how they tweet so that you, a stranger, can engage with it to your satisfaction.

Lmao, no, they didn't? Vagueblogging isn't twitter specific. People even vague post here, and it's generally not met well. If anything, it hints at tumblr. But whatever.

It's not entitlement or demanding to say you dislike how someone conducts themselves (but uh if that's how we're defining it...). There's no expectation of change. I definitely have no interest in engaging with them, because clearly how we use socialize is very at odds.

I misremembered because of the direction the conversation took, but being tumblr and not twitter doesn't actually change things. We certainly weren't talking about the fic discussion thread.

It's not entitlement or demanding to say you dislike how someone conducts themselves (but uh if that's how we're defining it...). There's no expectation of change.

No, no one said dislike = entitlement. No one disagreed with people who said they disliked seeing vagueblogging. But saying "having a single coherent thought about an established subject isn't really all that much to ask for" is an expectation that is entitled when people aren't writing for you. There is no expectation that every single tweet or tumblr text post is supposed to have coherent thoughts about established subjects. Calling people names and making assumptions about their intelligence because they want to be able to say "ugh I didn't like this" on their blogs or twitters without explaining themselves to you, a random stranger, is both entitled and over the top.

da

Also, disliking the practice of vagueblogging because of its pettiness, smallmindness, propensity to generate wank, whatever, and judging someone who engages in it excessively =/= being upset that someone expressed an opinion, even a negative one, on their personal social media without "context" or "support" or ~contributing to a conversation that they aren't trying to have or providing constructive criticism or analysis that no one is paying them to provide. "No one expects professional reviews, but..." blahblahblah is a reasonable thing to say if you're talking about, like, Amazon reviews or AO3 comments, but saying that about someone's personal social media is assuming that that social media exists for your edification, which it doesn't.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

#26 — Vanek! with a Jurco

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting

Re: Fandom Venting