Mock. Mockmockmock. Mockity-mock-mock

1:10am: Dedicated to the Triskaidekaphobiacs
Some of you may be wondering why non-member/anon commenting is currently switched off on fandom_wank. Less than 10% of fw members have voted in the related poll so far, so this is your chance to have your say, if you don't know what's going on.

There's been a poll about it on fw_debate. Go HERE to vote, or voice your opinion, if you care. Further discussion and/or wanking has been taking place HERE and HERE. Previous discussion HERE.

Comments off on this post. Grab your bathing suits and rubber duckies, and dive into the splooge on the links above, if ya want.

(PSA and wank links in one post. Dun complane!)

ETA: there seems to be some disquiet in fw_debate about my turning comments off on this post. I did it as it was suggested by others as a way of making a PSA on f_w. No other reason. *turns them on to stop the whining*

ETA II:Attack of the Mod

Apparently, I'm now up for BANNING!</b> on fw_debate. (How many days will I get before they decide?) This is the reason why people are reluctant to post PSA's on f_w. Funkyhelix (well-connected) can come in and bully people with her screaming, and get away with it, but an ordinary member can't go with some suggestions made on fw_debate and make a PSA (albeit, with a bit of snark attached. Hey, this is fandom_wank!). I have to say, I'm not surprised backfromspace came up with this since he was the one who wanted to ban me before. There's been some disquiet among the so-called Cabal today. Snacky (the main stirrer), Eljuno and Funkyhelix(all over the place) have been whining about my post here. So, fellow F_Wers, go vote. Just remember, you're voting for more than my banning. You're voting for whether you think ordinary non-in-crowd members should be able to post meta-topics, and engage in some snark at the same time, without getting banned!. Don't forget, I did change my post as people asked. The fact that my post changed the vote for allowing anons from 'no' to 'yes' has especially displeased some people. Your community, you decide.

Final Point: I think it's appropriate to update here as it's related to this post.

6:11pm: small morsel of fossilized star trek wank
while innocently canvassing teh internets for a vaguely-remembered report that the actor responsible for ds9's garak made him gay on purpose¹, i accidentally stumbled on this priceless piece of one guy's "carefully-considered and well-supported perspective" on whether slash belongs in star trek (in case you haven't already smelled the ending, he's not homophobic, but for the most part those characters just aren't gay).

"is slash really trek?"

his "non-homophobic" "characterization-based" anti-slash position is admittedly the 1,600,042nd verse and pretty much the same as the first, but i thought he had some particularly funny condescending turns of phrase. also, the essay's relatively short on the tl;dr and should go down with just a spoonful of sugar or cherry lube, your choice.

(p.s.: and for once, the characters are being hijacked and not raped.)


my pitiful attempt at background, and some samples. ( They are opinionated and infuriating—in large part because I'm invariably correct )

¹: in case your curiosity was piqued, i found it here.