People who want to shut down Ao3 are the antivaxers of fandom tbh
Ao3 & OTW: is the crowning achievement of fandom, protects all fans’ right to create content, maintains a safe and stable archive to host that content without profiteering or interference from corporate interests
Someone too young to remember the dark days of C&D letters and arbitrary deletion: but even though I have no data to support my position I just KNOW it’s harming children!!!
Every year, multiple times a year, they convince ppl to fork out thousands of dollars and….literally nothing changes. There’s no doubt in my mind they’re pocketing most of this money lol
Yep
That’s what’s so wild to me. They’ve made exactly 0 changes other than adding the ‘Exclude’ tags and that def doesn’t take 130k.
You know if any of you actually bothered to click the link it’ll take you to their budget update and break down exactly what the spend the money on, over 70% of which is spent on server expenses, monitoring tools and system licences.
They also spent a good amount of the rest of the 30% budget on significant server overhaul costs.
AO3 is literally a service you get for free and the audacity you’d have to not bother reading the very open budget plan they have, but to then bitch and whine about people donating to keep the site running is wild.
Has anyone noticed how much Tumblr discourse is starting to be peppered with ‘embarrassing’ and ‘yikes’ as one-word responses when you disagree with someone? It’s really interesting how this choice of languages hammers home the ‘in-group’ opinion/correct opinion as something that doesn’t even need to be stated, and presents opposing opinions as embarrassing and something to be mocked.
These two words are, at their heart, conformist. They promote conformity and ridicule diversity. I find this deeply concerning – it’s like something the popular kids at high school would say to embarrass the less popular kids. They want their superiority to be acknowledged without explanation or justification, and they get off on mocking people who are different.
Honestly, I’d encourage you not to fall into using this language without understanding why it’s an effective means of shutting down opposition and how it works. It’s anti-debate language that focuses on ridiculing the person who has the opinion rather than debunking the opinion and explaining how you believe it’s incorrect/harmful.
This is really good meta and fits with my current vague hypothesis about the broader emerging foulness, and the tendency for appearances to be valued over results or factual accuracy, in the present dysfunctions of social justice discourse.
Namely, that it is a specific backlash against the people at the fringes who started speaking up for themselves in the big diversity acceptance boom of a few years ago.
I notice this most as an autistic person, because that’s where this stuff hits me most. It’s all a bunch of microaggressions against autism, even when the discussion takes place between allistics and autism is mentioned nowhere in the discussion; a bunch of “I’m socially suitable and people who disagree with me aren’t, and boy howdy those socially unsuitable people should get away from me” signalling.
And so even if you do agree with them about whatever they’re talking about, if you’re aware that you’re classed as socially unacceptable for some other reason, it sends the hostile message ‘if your social skills slip around me, you’re toast.’
One of the things that really gets to me about Tumblr fandom’s view of relationships is the idea (sometimes stated outright, often implied) that there’s some kind of clear dividing line between healthy and not-healthy, between abusive and not-abusive, that people never slide back and forth between those things or slip over the line, and that’s just … not how human relationships work. And it’s one thing when you’re holding fictional characters to an absurdly high standard, but it makes me worry that a lot of people are internalizing the idea that human relationships aren’t messy and complicated and sometimes painful, and that’s really going to make life hard for you. You’ll either end up beating yourself up way too much for doing utterly normal things, or beating up on other people for doing utterly normal things, and you’ll let a lot of things that could have been good slip through your fingers because they aren’t perfect.
Look, I’m not saying anybody should stay in a relationship that’s toxic for them, and ideally we should all be in happy supportive relationships with people who make us happy all the time, but human emotions are a mess.
You WILL do terrible, awful things. You’ll be selfish. You’ll hurt people. Sometimes they’ll forgive you and sometimes they won’t. Every long-term relationship you have will end up being littered with the memories of times you were both awful to each other.
You’ll fall in love with people who don’t love you, and be loved by people you don’t love. Sometimes you might try to make a relationship (or a friendship) work anyway. Sometimes it’ll even work out.
You’ll end up loving some people you never in a million years thought you’d feel that way about, because you got a terrible first impression and misjudged them. You’ll look back and think, How could I not have known how awesome they were? But you didn’t, then. And you’ll walk away from other people who could have been just as beloved and never know it.
A lot of times you won’t be able to tell how other people feel about you at all, and you’ll just have to keep going anyway.
You’ll break up friendships by doing stupid, selfish things.
You’ll put your trust in the wrong people, and the wrong places, and have it broken.
You’ll do some things thinking you’re the good guy at the time, and realize in retrospect that you weren’t.
You’ll change your mind about a lot of stuff. You’ll realize that some of the things you used to believe were kind of messed up. Sometimes you’ll change your mind because of people around you and then realize that you were right all along. Sometimes you’ll realize that nobody’s right or wrong, but have to make a decision anyway.
You’ll interfere where you shouldn’t and get your ass handed to you. You’ll fail to interfere where you should have, and feel guilty for the rest of your life.
(Not everyone will do all of these things. But it’s humanly impossible not to do at least some of them.)
And none of that makes you an awful person or undeserving of love or bad to be around?! It’s just how people are. It’s how EVERYONE is, even the ones who seem like they have it together. Life is messy and complicated and confusing, and it hurts. People can do awful things and be forgiven. In fact, if that weren’t true, none of us would have any relationships at all.
I don’t know, I’m just thinking about this today, because expecting perfection of fictional characters is one thing (they’re fictional, it doesn’t hurt them) but it’s going to mess you up in all kinds of ways if you think that’s actually how real life works.
I feel like with the new ~fandom drama~ or whatever going around, I should re-introduce my favorite theory of fandom, which I call the 1% Theory.
Basically, the 1% Theory dictates that in every fandom, on average, 1% of the fans will be a pure, unsalvageable tire fire. We’re talking the people who do physical harm over their fandom, who start riots, cannot be talked down. The sort of things public news stories are made of. We’re not talking necessarily bad fans here- we’re talking people who take this thing so seriously they are willing to start a goddamn fist fight over nothing. The worst of the worst.
The reason I bring this up is because the 1% Theory ties into an important visual of fandom knowledge- that bigger fandoms are always perceived as “worse”, and at a certain point, a fandom always gets big enough to “go bad”. Let me explain.
Say you have a small fandom, like 500 people- the 1% Theory says that out of those 500, only 5 of them will be absolute nutjobs. This is incredibly manageable- it’s five people. The fandom and world at large can easily shut them out, block them, ignore their ramblings. The fandom is a “nice place”.
Now say you have a medium sized fandom- say 100,000 people. Suddenly, the 1% Theory ups your level of calamity to a whopping 1000 people. That’s a lot. That’s a lot for anyone to manage. It is, by nature of fandom, impossible to “manage” because no one owns fan spaces. People start to get nervous. There’s still so much good, but oof, 1000 people.
Now say you have a truly massive fandom- I use Homestuck here because I know the figures. At it’s peak, Homestuck had approximately FIVE MILLION active fans around the globe.
By the 1% Theory, that’s 50,000 people. Fifty THOUSAND starting riots, blackmailing creators, contributing to the worst of the worst of things.
There’s a couple of important points to take away here, in my opinion.
1) The 1% will always be the loudest, because people are always looking for new drama to follow.
2) Ultimately, it is 1%. It is only 1%. I can’t promise the other 99% are perfect, loving angels, but the “terrible fandom” is still only 1% complete utter garbage.
3) No fandom should ever be judged by their 1%. Big fandoms always look worse, small fandoms always look better. It’s not a good metric.
So remember, if you’re ever feeling disheartened by your fandom’s activity- it’s just 1%, people. Do your part not to be a part of it.
this is great!
It also complies with the “killer theory”. I don’t remember exact names, but people in online games are generally divided into four groups:
– explorers research game opportunities, they don’t mind playing alone, usually don’t hurt others, but sometimes they can exploit game weaknesses
– achievers play to win, to gain points, popularity. They need both explorers who know all perks, and socializers – as their followers and support
– socializers – they play because their friends are all here, they like to be together, they are usually most of the players, they can be easily led astray
– killers – for some reasons they come to hurt others, be it hurtful remarks in the chats or disturbing behavior
A tiny amount of killers is manageable and even profitable. (All four types are important). Killers raise stakes for the achievers, give socializers something to talk about in their groups and give explorers incentives to invent something new.
Angered explorers are the top predators here – but they must be seriously offended, and since they play on the outskirts of the game, killers rarely fight them. Killers usually go for the weakest (socializers) or most noticeable (achievers).
But if the game, by its design, somehow attracts to much killers, who scare socializers, leave achievers without their rewards and – by choking the environment – make it boring for the explorers (what I gonna explore here? ten kinds of dick-related-nicknames? Pff!) – they effectively kill the game.
This is awesome. In fandom terms, I think whether a fandom tends to be, in general, a pretty decent place to be with a small tire fire here or there, or one big flaming dumpster fire, probably has a lot to do with who the 1% in that fandom are. If you’re unlucky enough to be in a fandom where a couple of the tire-fire people are the ones who run the exchanges, or the most influential shippers of your particular small pairing, or the big BNF, you are screwed. Even though the vast majority of the fandom undoubtedly still consists of sane and decent people, it’s going to be really hard to avoid the 1%, and they’ll actively drive people out.
On the other hand, some of my best times in fandom have been in calm, sane corners of fandoms that I knew had raging dumpster fires going elsewhere, but I never had to deal with them because my part of the fandom was quite nice.
Large fandoms are a mixed blessing that way … more and bigger tire fires (and more visible to outsiders), but also, with more people and more ships, it’s easier to find cozy little pockets of sanity in which to nest.
jinlinli 