Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Under Your Spell ([info]underyourspell) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2004-04-26 19:56:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:annoyed

Not Knowing When to Give Up
Or, whenever you post, the baby Jesus cries another Fandom Wanker decides you’re an asshat.

The other day [info]coclytus posts some mild wank having to do with the wording of a certain HP BNF. Most of the wank revolves around whether or not the post was true wank in the first place. Not surprisingly, most of the FA crowd of wankers, unbiased as they are, decide this isn’t proper wank for various reason. Meanwhile, Heidi herself, posts on numerous occasions. At the height of the wank, one anonymouse estimated Heidi’s post count at sixteen and counting.

Said wank died down as Fandom Wankers everywhere moved on to other issues, but Heidi can’t leave it alone. She’s back, still trying to defend her position, especially here and here.

Nice how in one of those she’s going on about how everyone who doesn’t know her and FAP misunderstood her confusingly worded post, but she completely missed [info]coclytus’ obvious sarcasm and chose to assume we’d all take it literally.

Doesn’t she realize that with every post she just digs the hole deeper? It’s amusing, really, to see how many ways she can come up with explaining it. She’s into the lawyerly language now. Can the lawsuit threats be far behind? Maybe if she put a FA person or two on Journal Fen’s abuse team, she’d get a better result.

So who needs fandom? If we sit back and wait long enough the wank comes right to our own doorstep



(Post a new comment)


[info]ari_o
2004-04-27 03:28 am UTC (link)
More pooh stars.

*pastes them on your forehead*
*mails you to Crystalmeth*

(Reply to this)


[info]sagralisse
2004-04-27 03:50 am UTC (link)
Heidi is teh funneh! I hope she comes and explains herself some more. I never got why Brad should be feel all proud if FA wins a Webby. I bet it'll take at least 3,000 words to explain that properly!

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]nicolae
2004-04-27 04:41 am UTC (link)
The thing is, she's nice (at least so far as I know) and I read that post and thought, gee, that sounds kinda presumptuous, huh, and went on with it, but the more stuff comes out here the more...well, *sporfle*.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 04:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cleolinda, 2004-04-27 06:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cleolinda, 2004-04-27 06:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]cleolinda, 2004-04-27 06:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]diamonde, 2004-04-27 08:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mirabellawotr, 2004-04-27 02:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 11:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:19 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:45 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:50 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 04:32 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 04:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 05:06 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 05:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:41 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 03:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sistermagpie, 2004-04-27 05:37 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-27 07:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 07:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-27 11:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 02:16 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 02:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:14 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 03:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:50 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 04:06 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 04:21 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 04:59 am UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 05:16 am UTC
... - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 11:46 am UTC
... - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 05:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]beccastareyes, 2004-04-27 04:04 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 04:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 04:50 pm UTC
Re: - [info]beccastareyes, 2004-04-27 04:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 04:48 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 04:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 05:17 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 05:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 10:53 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 10:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 10:59 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 11:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 11:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 11:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - rama_snark, 2004-04-29 06:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-29 04:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mindset, 2004-04-27 11:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 11:31 pm UTC

[info]random_dent
2004-04-27 04:03 am UTC (link)
Do we need another community? Fandom_wank_wank? Recursive_wank? Self-reflexive_wank?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]meril
2004-04-27 04:19 am UTC (link)
Metawank?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]darkrose, 2004-04-27 04:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]vassilissa, 2004-04-27 12:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]smo, 2004-04-27 05:33 pm UTC

meshou
2004-04-27 05:06 am UTC (link)
A metawank community wouldn't be a bad idea. I keep seeing more and more wank centered around "IT'S FANDOM WANK! HIDE THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN!" or "They wanked me! Those bitches!"

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]smo, 2004-04-27 05:34 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2004-04-27 05:42 am UTC (link)
I'm using it pursuant to one of its two primary definitions, I don't think I'm out of line for expecting people to read it the way I wrote it.

Well she has learned all the right rhetoric from lawschool. She must have paid a lot for that Kaplan course. Too bad she was absent that day they taught cutting your losses and making a deal when you are way behind.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2004-04-27 11:26 pm UTC (link)
Jesus Christ, why are you so bitter?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 07:29 am UTC
Who cares?
[info]dogatemysocks
2004-04-27 07:21 am UTC (link)
It really isn't that big a deal.

She made a mistake, admitted that she could see how it was misread, and you would think "that's the end of that." I don't see the point of rewanking something so trivial, after all it was pretty obviously an honest misreading by most and maybe an intentional one by some.

Let's just keep in mind that, no matter how completely fun it is to make fun of people when they do dumb/amusing/spacey things, it's still just. the. internet. Which goes to both sides of this argument, really.

Anyway, I hope we can find something wankworthy soon... O_o

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Who cares?
[info]mirabellawotr
2004-04-27 07:30 am UTC (link)
Psst - you might want to read the post before you respond to it. Just saying.

No matter how trivial the original wank might have been, and I have to admit that to my eyes this post has the definite flavor of an ax-grinding wank to it, the fact remains that Heidi has been around Fandom Wank long enough to know that when you get wanked you are not going to help your case by posting some twenty increasingly verbose, jesuitical, painfully earnest comments on the topic of How I Was Not Wanky Really Really And Also What I Did Over Summer Vacation. That's what the wank is about at this point, not her original post.

Well, that and all the FA people jumping in to tell us how SO NOT WANKWORTHY it all is, because you could set your watch by that shit and it never stops being funny.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Who cares? - [info]yankthewank, 2004-04-27 09:32 am UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]experiential, 2004-04-27 10:15 pm UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-27 11:47 am UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]littleshebear, 2004-04-27 03:47 pm UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]mirabellawotr, 2004-04-28 02:38 pm UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]dogatemysocks, 2004-04-28 12:54 am UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]coclytus, 2004-04-28 01:42 am UTC
Re: Who cares? - [info]dogatemysocks, 2004-04-29 08:39 am UTC

[info]tybalt_quin
2004-04-27 11:55 am UTC (link)
most of the FA crowd of wankers, unbiased as they are, decide this isn’t proper wank for various reason

As an FA wanker, can I just say that I didn't say it wasn't proper wank? Or is that wanky? ... It's probably wanky. I know, "shut up t-q" ... le sigh.

I'm not denying the wank interpretation I just think that Heidi's not the only one beating limp meat here.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2004-04-27 03:51 pm UTC (link)
Weird, a t q post with no *shrugging* in it!

*shrugs*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 03:58 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:08 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 08:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:13 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 08:16 pm UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:18 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 08:20 pm UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 12:51 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 12:56 am UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:01 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 03:00 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 03:04 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 03:03 am UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:51 am UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 06:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 05:53 pm UTC
Re: - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 06:13 pm UTC

[info]sagralisse
2004-04-27 05:03 pm UTC (link)
You seem confused about the purpose of the wank. It's for amusement, not for assigning blame. Part of the entertainment is that you are completely and utterly humorless, yet you still must post and post and post and keep on posting and you don't understand why nobody will take you seriously.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 05:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:09 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 06:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:18 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 06:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 06:38 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 07:13 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 07:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 08:22 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 08:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 08:42 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 08:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]naienko, 2004-04-27 10:52 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-27 10:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 12:26 am UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 12:43 am UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 01:01 am UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:04 am UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 02:19 am UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:56 am UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:14 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 03:38 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:42 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 03:45 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:51 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 03:53 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 04:44 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 04:50 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 05:10 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 05:18 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 05:23 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 05:25 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 05:46 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 05:48 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 06:04 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 06:08 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 06:18 pm UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 06:22 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 06:37 pm UTC
... - [info]naienko, 2004-04-28 02:20 am UTC
... - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:54 am UTC
... - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 08:01 pm UTC
... - [info]yadda, 2004-04-29 12:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:21 am UTC
(no subject) - tintin, 2004-04-28 06:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]anatsuno, 2004-04-28 12:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 02:55 pm UTC
... - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 03:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]cesare, 2004-04-28 05:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 12:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phosfate, 2004-04-27 10:52 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 11:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 11:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 12:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-28 12:46 am UTC

[info]darkerthanpale
2004-04-27 03:44 pm UTC (link)
Really, I don't think that the original post deserved to be posted in the first place. I mean, so, uh, Heidi said something that could be taken the wrong way - but no-one did, apparantly, until the OP posted here. There was no wank, there was no drama, and my feeling (later affirmed by the OP's comments, such as 'Because it's never wanky when it's about FA. Or CC. *rolls eyes*') was that Heidi was simply an easy target, since she's a 'BNF', and, thus, the OP could get easy laughs without people going 'wtf? where's the drama?'. Because you (reasonably) often get posts that are made that comment on things lacking in spooge, and you'll get several 'uh, dude, where's the wank?' comments without people claiming that said commenters are minions of the person/thing 'wanked', and I think that aside from anyone's personal feelings about Heidi it's clear that there was NO actual wank. An ambiguous comment that no-one had taken umbrage with on LJ, yes, but splooge? Distinctly lacking :-?

I personally think that the original post should have been on i_wank - I mean, after someone commented on the lack of wankiness, coclytus said 'No, but now that you're all over here to tell us how it's not wanky, the real wanks about to begin. *pulls up bowl of popcorn*' which makes it rather obvious that he/she/it was trying to create wank rather than pointing it out. Which, uh, qualifies it for i_wank (or does it, because no-one had wanked by that point? The meta, the meta!).

Well, it's either that, or coclytus actually DID completely misunderstand Heidi's post (as other f_wers did later on), which is, uh, a little embarrassing for him/her/it, because what she meant by it IS pretty obvious unless you read it completely out of context, which coclytus clearly didn't.

Eh. It's just that if everyone posted to f_w as soon as anyone in any fandom anywhere posted something that would be wanky if you took it the wrong way but up until that point no-one had done... well, other than overloading the journalfen servers, not a lot would be going on. You want to mock what someone said? Go to mock_the_stupid, and then IF it gets wanky there, post over here. Otherwise we get bored, and you come off as someone with an axe to grind. Yeah, it's easy to 'wank' HP BNFs, because they're not the most well liked group of people over here, so you'll have lots of people joining in, but it's not particularly amusing. I mean, where are the pastede on heds?!

I think that most of us are friends with people who've been wanked, or we've been wanked ourselves, and if there's actual wank there we take it in our stride. This happens to be a case when there was undeniably no actual wank; I don't think there's anything wanky with saying so. Even if Heidi had made a locked post saying 'muahaha, I'm using reverse psychology on everyone to get them to vote for us, and, by the way, THERE WOULD BE NO LIVEJOURNAL WITHOUT FA!!', it still wouldn't constitute wank if no-one commented on it, even though the comment would be laughable. It's like the whole 'does it make a sound if no-one's there to hear it?' thing - it's not wank until someone's acknowledged it, even if it was a very wanktastic thing to say. Or, uh, something.

So, yeah. Completely suitable for i_wank; not so suitable for f_w. IMO.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]coclytus
2004-04-27 04:26 pm UTC (link)
First definition of wank from the main page: "Self-aggrandizing posturing."

That's how I was looking at it. Some people had fun with it anyway. Whatever floats your boat. There are enough posts around here to keep everyone entertained.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-27 04:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]coclytus, 2004-04-27 04:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-27 05:27 pm UTC

[info]big_bad_wolf
2004-04-27 04:40 pm UTC (link)
Eh, this is why I stay out of fandom - don't have to defend anyone when they get wanked, whether or not it's appropriate.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-27 05:40 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-27 06:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 06:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-27 06:17 pm UTC
Re: - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 06:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-27 06:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - tocomfortyou, 2004-04-28 08:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-28 02:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-27 05:58 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-27 06:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-27 06:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 07:04 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-27 07:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 01:28 am UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 11:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 01:13 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 01:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 02:28 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 02:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 02:37 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 02:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 02:45 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 02:53 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 04:20 pm UTC
Re: - [info]big_bad_wolf, 2004-04-29 05:57 pm UTC

[info]sagralisse
2004-04-27 04:54 pm UTC (link)
I thought her original comment was smug, pretentious and incorrect in its assumptions. It belonged on f_w, because it was entertaining wank.

This one belongs on f_w, because you people are batshit insane.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-27 05:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-27 06:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-27 06:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]experiential, 2004-04-27 10:18 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darkerthanpale, 2004-04-29 01:21 am UTC
bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 08:12 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]phoenix_knight, 2004-04-27 10:51 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 10:54 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]naienko, 2004-04-27 10:59 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]phoenix_knight, 2004-04-27 11:01 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 11:06 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]phoenix_knight, 2004-04-27 11:12 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 11:17 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 05:52 pm UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]phoenix_knight, 2004-04-29 01:51 am UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-29 01:58 am UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]phoenix_knight, 2004-04-28 02:30 am UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]persephone, 2004-04-28 12:36 am UTC
Re: bat shit crazy! - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-28 12:56 am UTC

[info]snacky
2004-04-27 09:31 pm UTC (link)
Nah, I think Heidi was being wanky. Not spectacularly, over-the-top wanky, but the note to Brad? Yeah, that was definitely wanky to me. Do I think she meant it the way it came out? Probably not, but it was funnier that way. ;-)

And continuing to insist over and over that everyone else (that is, besides her defenders) read it wrong, rather than saying, "Gee, if everyone is taking it this way, maybe it's me. I could have worded it wrong" - that's really wanky. If she thinks she's right, than fine, she's right. But continuing to argue and argue and argue when people have pointed out to her (quite nicely, in some cases) exactly how and why her words could be misinterpreted? And especially because her argument basically consists of "I'm right because I said so and you're not because you're wrong and stupid?" Makes her the Wanker Queen for the Day.

As for whether the first post should have gone to [info]i_wank, nah, I don't think so. [info]coclytus would have had to wanked all over Heidi's LJ to make it fit there. And it doesn't matter if there wasn't wank in Heidi's LJ, if [info]coclytus thought it was wanky, he/she can make a post.

This second post, yeah, seems like axe-grinding to me. But once again, the wank comes mostly from the comments. *g*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 10:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - tocomfortyou, 2004-04-28 08:56 am UTC

[info]bunny
2004-04-27 09:12 pm UTC (link)
The comments in this wank are even wankier than in the original post!

The first person who wanks the wank of the only slightly wanky wank, gets a cookie and oral sex!

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 09:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]coclytus, 2004-04-27 09:20 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]nonny, 2004-04-27 09:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ari_o, 2004-04-27 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]coclytus, 2004-04-28 01:50 am UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]naienko, 2004-04-28 02:24 am UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:53 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]naienko, 2004-04-28 06:12 pm UTC
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 06:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]naienko, 2004-04-28 08:09 pm UTC

[info]ignatius
2004-04-27 11:38 pm UTC (link)
From one of the links above:

And if I hadn't shown up here to post my replies, people would've just called me arrogant and intimated that I thought I was too good to explain myself. Again, damned if I did, damned if I didn't. Once we were nominated for the WEBBY, there was no way to avoid showing up here on F_W, was there? If we hadn't posted about it, one of the FAPers would've, and then someone would've called the mods passive-aggressive. If we had banned all discussion of it on FA (in defiance of our principle not to bar topics) we would've been justifiably slammed for censorship. Isn't that a little absurd, to know that people would engage in mockery because a third party - a party completely separate from the fandom - *likes* the site?

What? First of all, we would have insulted her if she hadn't shown up to defend herself? When have we ever done that? Is that something we do? Let me know, so I can go to the many, many posts where the original wanka never showed up: this means I have free reign to make fun of them for... not... wanking more.

Secondly, it was inevitable for FA to end up here because- one of the people who frequent FA would have posted about it, and if the mods didn't respond, we'd all be racing over here to call them passive-aggressive?

Wow. Um, persecution complex much?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 05:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ignatius, 2004-04-28 10:39 pm UTC

[info]oysteria
2004-04-28 12:40 am UTC (link)
This thread is some wanky shit.

(Reply to this)


[info]malachan
2004-04-28 12:49 am UTC (link)
The wank is pastede on yay!

(Reply to this)

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: FA Rules!.. - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:09 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: FA Rules!.. - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 11:58 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
Re: - [info]tybalt_quin, 2004-04-28 01:17 pm UTC

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]llama_treats
2004-04-28 03:06 am UTC (link)
So, are we going to have a metawank about percy_weatherby next?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-28 04:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]llama_treats, 2004-04-28 05:40 pm UTC
8-ball says "comment unclear" - [info]llama_treats, 2004-04-28 06:49 pm UTC
Re: 8-ball says "comment unclear" - [info]ashenmote, 2004-04-28 11:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]liarliar, 2004-04-29 05:27 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 07:08 pm UTC

(Reply from suspended user)
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 07:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2004-04-28 10:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]malachan, 2004-04-28 10:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 11:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]muffinbutt, 2004-04-28 09:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sagralisse, 2004-04-28 11:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]muffinbutt, 2004-04-29 12:44 am UTC

(Reply from suspended user)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map