(Post a new comment)

	shoiryu 2003-11-25 11:37 pm UTC (link)
	....cherrymilk. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	raisedbyhyenas 2003-11-25 11:37 pm UTC (link)
	Ooops! Apologies to CherryScott. :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	prettyamyrose 2003-11-25 11:45 pm UTC (link)
	Have standards lowered that much that this is considered wank? (Reply to this)

(Anonymous)
2003-11-25 11:48 pm UTC (link)

Hm. That was fast. Anyway.

My explanation of why I posted to the journal: but the link I posted being deleted last night, I can't exactly reply to the comment that said 'put this in wtf_inc because it's being deleted' .

You missing my explanation: Whether it's a glitch or if the mods are getting harder on the comm guidelines remains to be seen.

So, here's the question again - if they're getting harder on the guidelines, what *does* belong in a community about trainwrecks?

People disagree what exactly constitutes a trainwreck

Yeah. Basically my question. Especially since people commenting on the original link (http://users.transfur.com/pf_guild/tutorials/drachen/index.html) (warning: NSFW, etc, but included for posterity) I posted *were* going "ew! ick!" and calling it a trainwreck and such. *I* was horrified. *I* wished I hadn't looked. And that's what the front page (http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=tws_support) of the community suggests *is* train wreck syndrome. My post was a bit on the pissy side, I admit, but it was the first thing i saw in my e-mail after a bad night's sleep. There you go.

~cherrymilk

(Reply to this)(Thread)

virago
2003-11-25 11:54 pm UTC (link)

Look... you're not going to argue your point here once somebody decides you're mockworthy. It just isn't going to fly. Especially if you take a long time explaining it; you're just adding more fuel to the fire.

I think the mods are getting pretty crackdown-happy for such a trivial comm based on subjective guidelines, especially considering that no other threads that I've noticed have been blitzed for being lame. But on the other hand (nowhere near my crotch, thank you), it's not my comm and I don't make the rules.

It hasn't interested me much lately; I'm finding I like wtf_inc a bit more (who knew I'd get bored with people going OMG!!!!!!!!!! at surgery and fat people?), so I really don't care if they're having crackdowns or not.

In short: It doesn't matter that much.

Need more caffeine now. Making no sense.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	prettyamyrose 2003-11-25 11:59 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, arguing here won't help much--arguing there won't help much either, mind. It is, after all, just a comm and not the be-all-end-all of the universe, so let 'em be bitchy. I think I need caffiene, too, 'cause I doubt that was coherent. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2003-11-25 11:59 pm UTC (link)
	No, actually, it did make sense, and you're right, I shouldn't have posted. Is wtf_inc really that good? I didn't bother looking, because it sounded like tws_syndrome, only with more "omg look somone wrote legolas/aragorn slash!" type posts. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	eljuno 2003-11-26 12:06 am UTC (link)
	Hey, I've been having fun on WTF_inc I don't feel the need to look at things and go "Nope. Eyes not bleeding." I can just go "That's some fucked up shit, there." (Reply to this)(Parent)

	virago 2003-11-26 01:53 am UTC (link)
	I've liked it so far. It's along the lines of TWS, but without the bitching about "This isn't trainwrecky enough!!" Mind, some people bitch that things are TOO trainwrecky, but that isn't as frequent. The links are milder, but then they're supposed to be, so it all depends on if you find that entertaining or not. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2003-11-26 02:23 am UTC (link)
	Uh, yeah, I took a peek after it was recommended and pretty soon into the comments saw "this belongs in tws!" so... I think I'll pass :) but thanks. (Reply to this)(Parent)

iczer6
2003-11-26 03:00 am UTC (link)

[I think the mods are getting pretty crackdown-happy for such a trivial comm based on subjective guidelines, especially considering that no other threads that I've noticed have been blitzed for being lame. But on the other hand (nowhere near my crotch, thank you), it's not my comm and I don't make the rules.]

I have to agree here. I think the mod that decided to delete the post was far more wanky than Cherrymilk, at least at first.

Hell far less TWSy stuff has been posted and AFAIK not been deleted, is someone power-tripping on TWS or what?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

dreamtoday
2003-11-26 11:25 am UTC (link)

I think the mods are getting pretty crackdown-happy for such a trivial comm based on subjective guidelines, especially considering that no other threads that I've noticed have been blitzed for being lame.

Heh. Those mods could come over here - f_w's guidelines are so simple they're even in the community name.

And yet.

But hey, apparently wank about fandom is precious and rare and one must fill the space with something or another, no?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	soleta 2003-11-26 05:09 am UTC (link)
	Flame. Darling. There's no point. They're going to mock you no matter what. this? is only making you wankier. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	ladybirdsleeps 2003-11-25 11:59 pm UTC (link)
	It's nice to see you again, cherrymilk. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2003-11-26 12:02 am UTC (link)
	Eh - thanks? Is this really my second time here? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	ladybirdsleeps 2003-11-26 06:24 am UTC (link)
	Yes. The previous time was for your tws-antics, as well. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	(Anonymous) 2003-11-27 04:06 am UTC (link)
	When was the first time? --ydia-- (Reply to this)(Parent)

	feenix 2003-11-26 12:33 am UTC (link)
	TWS itself is a trainwreck. cherrymilk is wanking furiously, and so are the "OMG THIS IS SO NOT A TRAINWRECK" contingent. And I still feel that the formation of a third comm is a waste and the root of the rampant TWS WAAAAAAANGST that's been rampaging my friendslist for the past two weeks. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	redpanda 2003-11-26 03:39 am UTC (link)
	If I never hear the word "wangst" again in my life, it'll be too soon. >.< But yes, both sides are terribly wanky, and as such this is amusing. :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

	bohicamouse 2003-11-26 05:20 am UTC (link)
	Third comm? What's the other besides TWS and WTF? (This is probably something really obvious I've forgotten . . . ) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	yadda 2003-11-26 05:50 am UTC (link)
	portal_of_normal (speaking of which, poor little PoN is in dire need of some lovin') (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	yadda 2003-11-26 05:52 am UTC (link)
	Scratch that, I just double checked my link and it's portal_o_normal, it's too cool to spell out the "of." (Reply to this)(Parent)

	zannechaos 2003-11-26 05:56 am UTC (link)
	Portal_o_Normal, I think. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	zana16 2003-11-28 10:18 pm UTC (link)
	What is your icon from? (Reply to this)(Parent)

zannechaos
2003-11-26 01:36 am UTC (link)

While I agree the first time

cherrymilk was wanked, she had it coming, this time, I'm looking at whoever did the deletion. I just posted this comment on that thread, and since I don't know how long that thread'll stay there:

I'm starting to agree [that TWS_Support's seen better days]. What's a genuine trainwreck for person A might be nothing for person B. Person C might be repulsed, person D might be amused.

Put it another way: Let's say it's a community about what foods are the best ever.

Person A posts that they like pears, and think pears are delicious.
Persons B, C, and D reply, agreeing.
Person E replies, saying they're allergic to pears so they don't qualify.
Person F says pears taste horrible, and they don't belong in the community.
Persons G, H, and I agree with F.
Person J says Person A doesn't know what constitutes as good food.
Person K Fandom_Wanks the thread and mocks Person A for liking pears.
Person A comes back and says they find pears delicious and so do some others.
Person L says "If everyone in the community cannot universally agree that a certain food is good, then it doesn't belong here, it belongs in the "I_Like_This" community."
Thread gets deleted.

You will almost never get something that's universally accepted as so-and-so. Hell, even major historical events that most people agreed were horrifying, others supported.

I'm thinking I can do with one community less right about now...which is a shame. I liked this place. I liked a helluvalot.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	virago 2003-11-26 01:55 am UTC (link)
	Since that will probably be deleted too, I just wanted to say that I think that post was a great summation. I just think that, as in SO many cases of, well, everything, that everybody needs to STFU. I'm done now. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	zinthos 2003-11-26 02:44 am UTC (link)
	Nothing to say except that I love your icon. Lovelovelove. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	loki 2003-11-26 03:38 am UTC (link)
	Your. Icon. Is. Fabulous. ...just thought you should know. ^^ (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rebeccasama 2003-11-26 07:53 am UTC (link)
	Thought you should know yours if fab as well. You draw it? g (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	loki 2003-11-26 08:11 pm UTC (link)
	Alas, no. I got mine from Bagenders http://bagenders.stormpages.com. (Reply to this)(Parent)

irk
2003-11-26 05:37 am UTC (link)

As I've already stated in previous warnings to posts with a lot of discussion going on, things don't get deleted if...it's a post with a lot of discussion going on. Ditch the tinhats please! nn;

While I agree the first time cherrymilk was wanked, she had it coming, this time, I'm looking at whoever did the deletion.

Is the anthro cowgirl THAT important to people? Because honestly, I'm pretty surprised at the amount of communal outrage over this. If people are that scared, they can always wtf it, but generally this would all smooth over if people would just CHILL.

I was waiting for TWS to get wanked again, because we've all been wanking really hard there. There's not much else to do, though. Letting posts go would cause the community to slip right back into the state it was in before, and the people who made the community weren't happy with that at all. Generally the problem has been balancing the actual fonders' interests with the interests of people who don't like spam with the interests of people who don't care about spam with the interests of people who think joining another community is too much effort with the interests of people who worry a whole lot over what defines a TWS with the interests of people who are morally outraged over post deletion. I'm beginning to think six arms are neccessary for all of that. I've seen the pears analogy before [but written for usenet, and it was about lightbulbs], but I don't think that's what's happening - we're not trying to get everyone to agree, we're just trying to compromise between things. Generally, there's just no way to make everyone happy, and flailing about in one way or the other with only one's own judgement to guide causes wank.

There's not much to do besides just wait till people calm down and discuss with the other moderators if anything else should be done. Mistakes are going to happen until it all gets smoothed out.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

zannechaos
2003-11-26 06:04 am UTC (link)

If people are that scared, they can always wtf it, but generally this would all smooth over if people would just CHILL.

Well, see - the annoyance factor comes into play over the fact that others found it trainwrecky too (and since I've now found the link elsewhere, I can't say it was too far off from a trainwreck.) and it was deleted.

Letting posts go would cause the community to slip right back into the state it was in before, and the people who made the community weren't happy with that at all.

It's not as though it was a link to a pretty daffodil or anything. It was wrecky. That's the point.

we're not trying to get everyone to agree, we're just trying to compromise between things.

You're contradicting yourself. In order to reach a compromise, all parties involved MUST agree. No matter WTF's posted, there WILL always be someone who says "This isn't a trainwreck!" and there will be things posted that are wrecky in various degrees to various people. WTF_Inc is going in the same direction. "This should be in TWS_Support!" "This should be in WTF_inc!" "This should be in "Portal_o_normal!"

You will never achieve uniform agreement on what or what doesn't constitute a train wreck the way things stand right now. The only way you and the other mods can ensure that is:

1) Close the community and make all current members submit no less than three links to things that fits their definition of "trainwrecky". Those that the mods don't agree with - kick them out.
2) All potential would-be members must submit no less than three trainwreck links for the mods to review and decide upon to determine whether or not the member would be an asset or a burden to the community.
3) Set the community on moderation, and have all posts personally approved before they hit the community.

That is the only way you can achieve uniform agreement -- and even then there's no guarantee. If something disgusts or horrifies us and yet we keep on clicking and looking -- right on the userinfo page, that's how a train wreck is described. It does not say "It is only a trainwreck if the mods think so."

The problem though is NOT with the moderators. It with every other single fucking idiot who bitches and whines every time something doesn't fit their personal concept. People are different. Get over it.

I'm not angry or even all that annoyed. It wasn't a major wreck for me, just seriously "ICK!" (and I'm not a furry-basher... if I don't find furries to be disgusting, yet I find that disgusting... yeah, that's a wreck in my eyes.)

Quite frankly, WTF_inc is redundant, because the vast majority of the posts overlap with TWS_Support in terms of content. What some people consider WTF, others would consider TWS, and vice versa. The only way to win this situation is for all the people bitching "This doesn't burn MY eyes so it can't be a trainwreck WAAAAAH!" to STFU.

And the mods need to start telling people that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	*puts on wank hat* ladybirdsleeps 2003-11-26 06:29 am UTC (link)
	It was wrecky. I looked at it and didn't think it was wrecky at all. It was just so small, and although it was weird, it wasn't disgusting. I'm actually surprised that other members of the community thought differently. Is it possible that the mods deleted the post without knowing that other members of the community found it wrecky? Just sayin'. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	rann 2003-11-26 10:05 am UTC (link)
	(and since I've now found the link elsewhere, I can't say it was too far off from a trainwreck.) flails! I wanna see! I wanna see! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	virago 2003-11-26 03:37 pm UTC (link)
	If nothing else, it should still be somewhere on the front page of Metafilter. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: rann 2003-11-26 03:42 pm UTC (link)
	looks it over Hmmm. Well, other than the fact that the photoshopping's really not that good, I don't see the big deal. ... But then, I'm used to these sorts of things. n.n (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	virago 2003-11-26 03:47 pm UTC (link)
	I wasn't terribly traumatized by it either, but IMO things of equal eh-ness aren't immediately bombed off the face of the earth like this one was. Of course, then, I'm picky and have unrealistic expectations about people applying the same standards to absolutely everything. ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)

irk
2003-11-26 10:45 am UTC (link)

Well, see - the annoyance factor comes into play over the fact that others found it trainwrecky too (and since I've now found the link elsewhere, I can't say it was too far off from a trainwreck.) and it was deleted.

And...OTHER people who didn't happen to reply to it found it non-trainwrecky, which is why it was deleted. It was a difference of opinion. Those things happen. I've let posts stay when they didn't TWS me but I could see how they could TWS others. I've deleted posts when people thought they were TWSes too, because honestly I think that at times people are too sensitive or just don't know what a TWS is. The cowgirl's orientation, I guess, is just going to have to remain one of life's myteries. No matter if the community is modded in this way or in the ways you listed, mistakes are still going to happen, and this is why I think people need to just CHILL.

You're contradicting yourself. In order to reach a compromise, all parties involved MUST agree.

No. In order to reach a compromise, all parties must give up something to reach a common goal. That's not "making everybody happy", which is what I meant when I said we couldn't make everybody happy, but we could try to compromise. If everybody were made happy in TWS, things would go exactly as everybody wanted, which isn't possible because they want different things. The compromise is in giving everybody a little of what they want and hoping they'll settle for an LJ community not to be run according to their exact specifications.

Zanne, right now, a list of ways detailing exactly how we can fix TWS, guaranteed, is something I have a lot of trouble replying to with any kind of politeness, because about 20 other people, between here and there, think they also know how to run the place. But my general theory of how this can be fixed? Everybody over there shuts the hell up and moves on. Actually applying this theory to the community is a bit tough, though, because stating things politely makes people quibble, and stating things bluntly makes them cry.

I think it'll just heal itself within a few weeks, really. I'm just tired of posters acting like TWS's regulations not being fair to them is a sign of the apocalypse.

[Well, that might have some credence to it. 4 mods, 4 horsemen...]

Blargh. In the end, I'd rather have been wanked for something cooler and more shocking than this. How come nobody's found that debacle over my underage hermaphroditic zebra plushie story yet?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

glomobius
2003-11-27 12:56 am UTC (link)

underage hermaphroditic zebra plushie??

I think I'd like to hear about that one! ^__^

I, for one, think you're doing a fine job managing TWS; there are a lot of n00bs who don't see clearly the definition of TWS yet.

It's been an awfully long time since I've seen anything that was actually TWS-y to me, but I've not yet wanked about it (if you don't count that post a while back with the harlequin bit... ^__^;). I figure I'll just roll along until something fun pops up!

~glo!anyway, it's not like I'm contributing, so what have I to complain about?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

bohicamouse
2003-11-26 11:08 am UTC (link)

The only way to win this situation is for all the people bitching "This doesn't burn MY eyes so it can't be a trainwreck WAAAAAH!" to STFU.

Word. There's no way all of us are going to agree on any one post or even an entire category of posts. Some people over there are extremely hard to squick and so they consider 9 posts out of 10 to be non-wrecky; I personally am very easy to squick and also consider 9 posts out of 10 to be non-wrecky (because for me part of the definition of a trainwreck is that I have to want to look at it, and there's no way in hell I'm clicking on a birth deformity or eye injury link). Those are two extremes and we're never going to see eye-to-eye on what acceptable TWS is--and that shouldn't matter as long as we don't have public OT drama about it and drag the community into a rut. And for a long time, nobody did, and I'm not sure why that's changed so drastically. Lately it's hard to find a single post without at least one comment that it doesn't belong on the comm. Keep it to yourself, dude.

(Although I did agree with Irk's smacking down of a member who posted a link to a very obvious parody article a couple weeks ago. I mean, there's being sensitive and then there's being just plain stupid.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous)
2003-11-27 12:53 am UTC (link)

(Although I did agree with Irk's smacking down of a member who posted a link to a very obvious parody article a couple weeks ago. I mean, there's being sensitive and then there's being just plain stupid.)

Well, y'know, there's a fine line between "smacking down" and "going off on someone like a psycho in need of anger-management over something totally trivial". Guess which side screaming at someone and calling her a "retard" because she didn't know something was a parody falls on?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	feenix 2003-11-26 05:57 am UTC (link)
	Best analogy EVER. (But, you already knew that.) Best icon EVER. (But you already knew that.) (Reply to this)(Parent)

rebeccasama
2003-11-26 07:58 am UTC (link)

Ok, this bit irked me.

Moderators: Loosen up.

I'm new here.....

Seriously as a mod people that come in and try to tell you what you need to do on the community drive me *insane* This is not to say that input on the comm and the running of it is a bad thing. But I find it kind of rude when someone joins and begins posting to the mods asap. (Maybe personal experience has made me bitter. I was a mod on a certain group and a new person joined in the middle of a wank which I promptly quashed. Said person threw hissy fit about how 'unfair' I was by banning main wanker and deleting the wank. OMG UR CENSORING THEIR 1ST AMENDMANT RITE! Started own comm without rules which promptly went down the toilet...not that I'm grinning about that or anything...)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	rebeccasama 2003-11-26 08:01 am UTC (link)
	Addendum: I kind of wish I had saved that old wank though. It was so F_W worthy. Such a beautiful thing sniff (Reply to this)(Parent)

virago
2003-11-26 03:44 pm UTC (link)

Actually, when it comes to that I agree with the sentiment, but I'd be pointing directly at the other side. People who take it upon themselves to tell everybody exactly what the comm is for, six at a time, in every damn thread, annoy the hell out of me.

This is probably too close to "if you don't like it, don't read it," but if you don't like a thread, is it so hard to ignore it? If there's a major problem, email the mods, but I really hate it when people become self-styled Almighty Guardians of Community Ontopicness. That's the mods/maintainers' job. That's what they're there for.

Meh, so glad I don't do this anymore. Anyway.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rebeccasama 2003-11-26 09:04 pm UTC (link)
	Oh yeah mod wannabes. Those are always fun, constantly reminding people of what's on topic and if they're violating a rule. I still mod some things because I'm apparantly a masochist.... g Actually, I haven't had any trouble with any of my lists in quite awhile. knocks on wood I would say that it seems people are growing up, but then I come here.... (Reply to this)(Parent)

	oxydosic 2003-11-26 06:26 pm UTC (link)
	Ah, good old cherrymilk. I've seen her get wanky on comms before. She seems to be able to go from zero to wanky quite quickly. But..i dunno, i don't think this was particularly wanky. I don't think her original post was really trainwrecky, but i obviously don't have the same opinions as others. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	pradaloz 2003-11-26 10:02 pm UTC (link)
	Never run into her before, don't know her from Adam, but I gotta say: everytime I read "cherrymilk," my lips pucker. Cherry-flavored milk? Nasty! The above post is neither substantive nor has anything to do with the topic at hand. Please remember to drink responsibly and use a designated driver. (Reply to this)(Parent)