Current mood:	Snarl
Entry tags:	fandom is fucking stupid, it's okay if i don't like you, jesus wept

At least SA goons are honest trolls, or, Fandom double-standards FTL
Over the years, the unspoken rule of fandom "What happens in fandom, stays in fandom." You don't contact a fan's place of employment, university, etc. unless it's serious shit -- "serious shit" meaning illegal or life-threatening, not fannish wars or bruised egos.

Apparently, not anymore.

hypersurfaces posted a con report about WisCon that focused on the obesity of the con attendees on the Something Awful board . The post is seriously unfunny and full of fail. She later had the post deleted, but it was later reposted at a related site, Something Awful Sychophant Squad.

Attendees on Wiscon discover the post, and all hell breaks loose. Massive amounts of rage, including posts (locked and the source for this didn't get caps) of several people threatening hypersurfaces about how they would hurt/STAB her if they saw her on the street. hypersurfaces is forever and ever banned from WisCon. But not content with that, people -- including badgerbag -- find her real name, her school, and write to her dean saying she was violating the schools sexual harrassment policy. I'm not posting the link because it has her real name in it, and I like my permanent account here too much to risk the ToS.

hypersurfaces real name and real info are posted all over by fen who have previously rallied against that sort of thing - because in this case, she clearly deserves it. The casual threats of violence are astounding, and now apparently people are writing her and saying they're going to hurt/kill her - using the real name/addresses so thoughtfully provided by the angry wisconners. Kudos to the mod there for at least stepping up and telling people to knock the shit out.

But nada about this behavior from fen normally so worried about community standards, like coffeeandink.

So it's okay now to post people's real names and similar information, as long as they do something that really, really pisses you off. Because they deserve it.

ETA: Clarified where hypersurfaces's post originally went up.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	esclaramonde 2008-05-29 09:10 pm UTC (link)
	I have no clue why you think it was deliberate. It sounds to me like PJ herself doesn't have all the information, because it's a bit scarce. Also, a way not to get her to edit the post the way you want her to is to get accusatory. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

risha
2008-05-29 10:08 pm UTC (link)

OK, I'm going to have to do this as a list; I don't think that a rant will help, it will just make me look like an idiot and/or troll.

1. It's entirely likely that pyratejenni didn't have all of the information to begin with, and was just reacting to the thought of addresses revealed and calls to mom and letters to the dean. Information has been trickling out slowly since last night, and my own opinions on the topic have slightly morphed and solidified as it did.

1b. The information isn't at all sparse anymore - there's gallons and gallons of it coming from every side. The SA, SASS, WisCon attendees, sphereosphere, and RM herself have all weighed in on the topic by this point.

2. pyratejenni disappeared for a considerable chunk of the day in order to sleep. Entirely reasonable.

3. Now that she's online again, has she posted any:
a. retractions?
b. corrections?
c. suitibly thoughtful replies that show that she's seen the new information and has thought about it?

From what I've seen, the answers to #3 have been No; Once - partially, at first incorrectly, and under duress, and by the way it's still not complete; and No.

4. Editing the post to correct herself, regardless of whether or not I sound accusatory, is the minimum level of decency, not an optional exercise.

So am I being accuratory? Last night I was polite and helpful, especially as I had already considered posting it myself (in a more balanced manner) but decided against it as I didn't need the stress. Now, yes, I am being accusatory. I generally like her, as I hold a policy of generally liking people until proved otherwise. But today she is being an asshat, and she needs to cut that shit out.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

esclaramonde
2008-05-29 10:14 pm UTC (link)

I didn't really mean just *you*, and I'm sorry that it came off that way. There are quite a few people who are acting like PyrateJenni has some kind of grudgey stake in this (note to them: bias /= grudge), and like she's not making changes because if she shows that there's more sense to this than it seems it will be her downfall!!1 Yours was just the last I saw. :/ I think she's just being obstinate because of said people.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	risha 2008-05-29 10:19 pm UTC (link)
	In all fairness, I'm annoyed at her, and therefore taking it out on others! Sorry about that. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	red_eft 2008-05-30 01:19 am UTC (link)
	Scarce? Really? I wasn't at WisCon, but I didn't find it difficult to get the story, pretty thoroughly. Many people have posted about it. BadgerBag, - the WisCon comm post is locked, but it's open membership. The way PJ posted it is so skewed from the impression that I got from reading any one of those posts indicates to me that it was deliberate. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	red_eft 2008-05-30 01:20 am UTC (link)
	arg, HTML, my nemesis! mystickeeper was supposed to be the second name there. (Reply to this)(Parent)

esclaramonde
2008-05-30 01:26 am UTC (link)

I'm finding it difficult, because I'm seeing a lot of hearsay. I'm not taking *anything* anyone says about the original post at face value. I finally got a link to it and saw that some of the things people were saying about it were clearly wrong, so I'm not trusting anything unless I see the original thing of it.

Badgerbag's post skeeved me out, because I didn't know she was also a member of the university. I'm still not entirely convinced.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -