Church of Nice isn't! Film at 11!
Over on LJ, justacat bemoans in a rant about how the 'cult of nice' doesn't get any respect. People agree, for the most part, until sheyheyred and brenk get into it.

ETA: A summary, because chaimonkey asked:



Justacat rants about how she feels bad about believing in the cult of nice:

"It's simple: I'm in favor of nice. I was going to say I'm proudly, unashamedly in favor of nice, but that's not entirely true, though I want it to be. People talk all the time about the "cult of nice" as if it's a bad thing, and I have felt kind of embarrassed by believing in it, apologizing for my pollyanna-ish-ness and for the seeming triteness of saying "why can't we all just get along?", reluctant to admit that that is how I feel. But I think I've gotten tired of apologizing. What is there to be ashamed of, after all, in wanting people in this community I love so much to be polite, to be nice, in wanting us to get along, to focus on what draws us together and remember that we are all fans? So there's a cult of nice? Well, to quote [info]carlanime, sign me up, damn it!*"

She also doesn't get the urge to be nasty, and wonders why writers should have to improve:

"The truth is, I just don't get the impulse to be nasty ... well, not just nasty. I don't get why some people feel compelled, in public forums, to criticize at all, to say negative things, and especially to say things that the speaker knows are likely to be hurtful, often ostensibly (and in my view disingenuously) for the good of the criticize-ee or in the name of "honesty" (about which more below). For me, fandom is a community. It's not a grad school seminar, not a publishing house, not a writing class. Most of us "know" each other, in some sense of the word - and while I believe our "fannish temperaments" and love for the characters, the stories, the shared pleasure, draws us together, we all participate in fandom for our own reasons, all love different things, all prioritize differently. For some fans writing well, improving, is a goal and a reason to participate; for others it isn't. Some people write fanfic because they love the characters and want to share their vision, and they just don't care whether they ever improve, whether their writing gets better. Improving isn't their goal, isn't their reason for being here, isn't what they value about participating in fandom."

Commentors agree, thought taverymate makes some good counterarguments:

"You're conflating public critical comments with rudeness and public ridicule, and there are real and significant differences between these. I'm generally in favor of public critique, which can be negative, but do not appreciate nor encourage public rudeness or public ridicule. I also don't encourage it in private - and that's where this type of discussion usually fails miserably. Issues of public vs private behaviors and hypocrisy are critical components in my view but ones that are typically ignored.

...

Very often, those who complain about public criticism in fandom are the same ones who slam stories and authors in totally viscious, mocking, and cruel ways in supposedly "private" forums. And that dichotomy of behavior is one that I find incredibly hypocritical and frankly, far more damaging than any example of public criticism.

...

All too frequently, the "private" criticism does get out, either accidentally or leaked with deliberate intent. Because you see, that "private venting" became entertainment, and people enjoyed the process because it meant that they were safe and part of a group (laughing even as they might have cringed just a bit inside), and all their friends were witty and cutting, but oh, so amusing and they just have to share what was said..."


Then brenk responds to taverymate's comment and addresses the situation in the Professionals community that sparked justacat's rant:


"I fully agree with you. There is a *world* of difference between flames and constructive (civil) criticism, but rather a lot of people cannot see that.

This was my comment:
"I thought the beginning felt like an action story, but that was soon dispatched with, and it turned into a series of long sex scenes that were basically rather trite and cliché-ridden, IMHO (Doyle saw two shining iridescent pools of deepest blue glowing back at him). Also, a few things like 'almost of their own violation' and 'recently departed armchairs' conjured up some interesting visuals. Also, considering the focus on the 'pressies', I can't understand why the reader never gets to know what they are. Making a reader guess some things can be interesting, but it seems pointless here, not to mention irritating.

All in all, it's really not my type of story (that's personal taste), but it's also sloppily crafted, which is a shame. A little more work on getting it more balanced and less syrupy would have made it far more memorable."

That ain't a flame, folks. I don't do flames. And please also note that this comment followed one (that appeared within 10 minutes of posting (6,000 words)), that read: "A super story. Well done from beginning to end. I really enjoyed this." The same person who took me to task on the list - in a highly personal way - about my comment. Ugh. Really. Commenting on comments is, in my mind, daft. And that sparked the whole thing. She deleted it afterwards for reasons that aren't clear to me - and so I deleted my own reply to her as it was pointless to leave it there."


Which led shayhered to post:

"Here's the thing: I don't have a problem, generally, with someone saying, in effect, "this story is not my cup of tea." I also have no problem with PRIVATE, LOCKED posts saying whatever the hell the author wants them to say.

...
Imagine my disgust, then, when the critiquer, who is [info]brenk, by the way, let's name names, commented in [info]queenbamfie's journal about how rude it was for people to comment adversely about her original comment! My goodness -- pot/kettle issues abound here, methinks.

Whatever the original reason for Brenda to be so mean -- even if she thought she was doing some sort of do-gooder act by her harsh criticism, the fact remains that it is unsupportably mean-spirited to comment as she did about a GIFT story. The story was not submitted for critical review -- it was given out of generosity. And if the recipient was nice enough to thank her for it, it behooves us all, as mere onlookers to the gift-giving, to be civil, or, frankly, shut the hell up. Brenda, in my opinion, should've waited for a story she liked, or for the author in question to say, "hey, what do you think?" "


Brenk replies and the "You're a bitch!" "No, YOU are!" volley goes on for a few more posts.


Damn. Trying to be the Nicest of Them All is Zerious Bizness!