Mock. Mockmockmock. Mockity-mock-mock

1:58am: Reviewer Wank: Scream 4 and spoilers and critics, oh my!
Small, and somewhat late, but the mousie who wrote this up for wank_report did such a good job that I thought it had to be done. One caveat, however: due to the vagaries of my internet connection, I cannot access Twitter right now, so I have no way of telling whether or not my links are working. If I've ballsed anything up, please let me know and I will try to fix as soon as I can. Anyroad:

Listen and attend, o my beloved. Once upon a time in a town called Melbourne, just north of Antarctica, there was a newspaper called The Age. And in The Age lived a happy little film critic called Jim Schembri. Lots of people hated him because of his unremitting dislike of Australian films - one film maker famously said "Fuck you, Jim Schembri!" as he accepted an Australian Film Institute award. Schembri once wrote a stingingly accurate satire on bloggers that I post here to demonstrate his acute grasp of new media.

But that doesn't matter right now. Suffice to say, the man has form.

The latest turn in the Schembri saga began when he spoiled the ending of Scream4 in the first sentence of a review that appeared online on the Fairfax news site for around 24 hours, and consequently spent a few hours at the top of the Rotten Tomatoes website. This, predictably enough, caused some online unrest, with upset tweeters saying things like "Douchebag! You spoiled the film!" etcetera. So the review's wording was slightly changed the following day so that the spoiler was not so evident. Fair enough. A mistake was made and rectified. But - and this is where the wank begins - some special internet magic happened.

It turned out that THERE HAD NEVER BEEN A SPOILER. Jim Schembri has a twitter account, notable for the fact that under his "following" tab is the number 0. Yes, he follows absolutely no one. And he posted a tweet which said that those who had seen the spoiler were hallucinating, or something.

Clearly, an Age critic is NEVER WRONG.

In brief: the story continues here and here, as picked up by fellow critic Luke Buckmaster.

But then came the truly bizarre twist: a crazy flurry of tweets in which Schembri started going on (and on) about a time machine - and making a mock, or so he thought, of Luke Buckmaster.

Buckmaster updates the story on his blog.

Much hilarity ensues on twitter, especially as Jim signs his tweets with his own name. But then...

He follows up with a series of breathless tweets promising the TRUE STORY of the Twitter outrage!

And lo and behold, my beloved, in today's Age the explanation is unfolded in its full glory. It was a social experiment! He planned it all along! Jim Schembri "punk'd the Twitterverse!" He's just like Noam Chomsky!

[Editor's note: A hint, dear critic: no-one, but no-one, is like Noam Chomsky. Possibly not even Noam Chomsky is like Noam Chomsky.]

The "twitterverse", naturally, is less than impressed, but highly amused to have its low expectations so richly rewarded. Also puzzled that a once respected Melbourne broadsheet daily is prepared to publish such drivel. How the mighty have fallen.

The moral of the story, children, is simple. See how much more work you make for yourself when you can't 'fess up to a simple mistake? How many keystrokes you waste? How the Will o'the Wisp of Vanity leads you ever deeper into the Swamps of Delusion and Stupid?

Bonus: Max Lavergne on That Time Machine.

Also, Schembri's twitter account

3:52pm: That mod is a monster! M-M-M-Monster!
There is a little fandom for a line of dolls called Monster High. Tanz_fanatika is a moderator and owner of a popular Monster High com known as monster_high. All seem well, yes?

It is, until a secret appears on Fandom Secret (It's secret number 6). Apparently, someone isn't happy with the way Tanz runs the com. Someone named Nekusagi comments, claiming to be the ban-ee in the secret. It isn't long until an anon informs her that no, this is a different wank. A different person has been banned for saying things in an f-locked post, revealing this isn't the first time Tanz has pulled this kind of thing. The anon drops some interesting links from Tanz's doll blog. She's been openly talking shit on whoever it is that she has banned.

Tanz eventually shows up at Fandom Secret, as well as some of her friends. She insists that if someone has a problem with her they should tell her to her face:

"Then people you care about should have handled the issues with me directly. I gave the opportunity for communication."

"People who deal with problems directly are more respected than those who don't. There's at least a chance then that things can work out. But if you don't even try to communicate, then there's no chance."

However, when some DOES reveal themselves and questions her moderation to her face, she bans them. But it's totally because they call her out in the wrong place:

"Now, now, you know better than that. Challenging me here was not the right venue. If you genuinely had a problem and contacted me privately, this could have worked out fine. But you guys chose to gang up on me in public after ganging up on me in private. There's no saving that.

Go play in your own comm. I'm sure you'll have fun there."

And that's not even close to the wanking Tanz and co. is doing in that Fandomsecrets thread.

ETA: Thanks to mice at wank_report for bringing this to my attention.

ETA 2: SF_Drama has reported on the wank too! Complete with more details, more wank and an awesome write up.