3rd letter to ff.net about Critics United
Oct. 23rd, 2012 12:13 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
edenfallingSome people do not know when to let a dead horse die. (Yes, I am apparently among that number. *wry*)
And a special message on behalf of some deeply concerned anonymice! I know you are aware that I never asked anyone to attack the members of Critics United, but apparently neither the lack of such a request or invitation nor the lack of such an attack (because I also know you have better uses for your time) is enough for some people to be certain that an attack was not somehow subliminally ordered. They fear it may be lurking in the metaphorical wings of the internet, waiting to descend like an avalanche upon the denizens of the Critics United forum. So let me be explicitly clear: please, everyone, DO NOT GO FEED THE TROLLS.
This is my Sisyphean argument, and I am perfectly capable of sending reasoned letters to ff.net as long as necessary. :-)
---------------
---------------
To whom it may concern,
I would like to report yet another instance of attempted intimidation by a member of the forum group calling themselves Critics United (http://www.fanfiction.net/forum/Critics-United/78623/). They continue to insist that rule 5 of the allowed content guidelines, which says:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, second person/you based, Q&As, and etc.
applies to all stories written in second person, rather than to INTERACTIVE stories that happen to also use second person to directly address the reader as a character. My story, "Me, Myself, and Die" (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8616496/1/), is NOT interactive. Second person is used as a basic POV alternate to first or third person and the viewpoint character is a canon character, which is made abundantly clear both in the summary and the text of the story itself. Additionally, no reader input is solicited for future chapter content, because the story is complete as it stands.
Here is a copy of the review in question, and my response:
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:18:39 -0700
From: WishingDreamer5 ( http://www.fanfiction.net/u/1726816/ )
-------------------
Since you know you're breaking the rules by posting something in second person, and you chose to ignore the previous warnings to make it first/third person, I have no other choice but to report you.
-WD5 [member of Critics United]
---------------
---------------
To which I responded:
As I have said to MrGoodyTwoShoes, Gaaras1Girl, and Runic Healer, the rule prohibits INTERACTIVE content. Second person is prohibited only when it is used in service of interactivity, as when the reader is directly addressed as if she or he were a character. My story is not interactive and uses second person as a basic POV alternate to first or third person, to convey the viewpoint of a canon character who is clearly named both in the summary and in the text itself. Therefore my story does not break the rules.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer
---------------
---------------
This makes FOUR members of Critics United who have attempted to intimidate me into deleting my story and/or have reported me for breaking a rule that I did not break. That is a clear and persistent pattern of bullying and abusive behavior, which is not in keeping with the spirit of your website. The members of Critics United are not helping unleash writers' and readers' imaginations. Instead, they are attempting to stifle creativity.
I repeat my request that the wording of rule 5 be changed to clarify that second person is not forbidden altogether, but only when used in an interactive fashion. That should prevent future spurious abuse reports of this type. I further request that an administrator contact Critics United and tell them to stop their campaign of intimidation against writers in general, and the Homestuck fandom in particular.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer (http://www.fanfiction.net/u/461224/Elizabeth_Culmer)
Member since 2003
And a special message on behalf of some deeply concerned anonymice! I know you are aware that I never asked anyone to attack the members of Critics United, but apparently neither the lack of such a request or invitation nor the lack of such an attack (because I also know you have better uses for your time) is enough for some people to be certain that an attack was not somehow subliminally ordered. They fear it may be lurking in the metaphorical wings of the internet, waiting to descend like an avalanche upon the denizens of the Critics United forum. So let me be explicitly clear: please, everyone, DO NOT GO FEED THE TROLLS.
This is my Sisyphean argument, and I am perfectly capable of sending reasoned letters to ff.net as long as necessary. :-)
---------------
---------------
To whom it may concern,
I would like to report yet another instance of attempted intimidation by a member of the forum group calling themselves Critics United (http://www.fanfiction.net/forum/Critics-United/78623/). They continue to insist that rule 5 of the allowed content guidelines, which says:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, second person/you based, Q&As, and etc.
applies to all stories written in second person, rather than to INTERACTIVE stories that happen to also use second person to directly address the reader as a character. My story, "Me, Myself, and Die" (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8616496/1/), is NOT interactive. Second person is used as a basic POV alternate to first or third person and the viewpoint character is a canon character, which is made abundantly clear both in the summary and the text of the story itself. Additionally, no reader input is solicited for future chapter content, because the story is complete as it stands.
Here is a copy of the review in question, and my response:
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:18:39 -0700
From: WishingDreamer5 ( http://www.fanfiction.net/u/1726816/ )
-------------------
Since you know you're breaking the rules by posting something in second person, and you chose to ignore the previous warnings to make it first/third person, I have no other choice but to report you.
-WD5 [member of Critics United]
---------------
---------------
To which I responded:
As I have said to MrGoodyTwoShoes, Gaaras1Girl, and Runic Healer, the rule prohibits INTERACTIVE content. Second person is prohibited only when it is used in service of interactivity, as when the reader is directly addressed as if she or he were a character. My story is not interactive and uses second person as a basic POV alternate to first or third person, to convey the viewpoint of a canon character who is clearly named both in the summary and in the text itself. Therefore my story does not break the rules.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer
---------------
---------------
This makes FOUR members of Critics United who have attempted to intimidate me into deleting my story and/or have reported me for breaking a rule that I did not break. That is a clear and persistent pattern of bullying and abusive behavior, which is not in keeping with the spirit of your website. The members of Critics United are not helping unleash writers' and readers' imaginations. Instead, they are attempting to stifle creativity.
I repeat my request that the wording of rule 5 be changed to clarify that second person is not forbidden altogether, but only when used in an interactive fashion. That should prevent future spurious abuse reports of this type. I further request that an administrator contact Critics United and tell them to stop their campaign of intimidation against writers in general, and the Homestuck fandom in particular.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer (http://www.fanfiction.net/u/461224/Elizabeth_Culmer)
Member since 2003
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 04:49 pm (UTC)As someone who has also written non-interactive, 2nd person POV stories, thank you for sticking it out! I'll be very interested to see ff.net's answer (if any).
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 03:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 02:15 pm (UTC)I'd like to say I can't believe they're still harassing you, but given that they post lists of stories for their members to report until deleted... I can't really say that.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 07:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 08:18 pm (UTC).. I like the accusation of delete-and-repost, too, since I reviewed while the others were still there, and now they are gone. Funny that!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 02:25 am (UTC)I mean, I haven't gone to the Critics United forums and started making a stink. So why am I somehow at fault when their members and/or supporters came to my journal and posted comments that rely on blatant untruths? As you say, I did not delete and repost my story; that would have removed your review as well as theirs. But apparently the idea that ff.net's admins could side with me instead of with Critics United is beyond belief and therefore I must have pulled a delete-repost trick, even if that doesn't fit the evidence. It's like starting with the conclusion and adjusting the facts to fit, instead of the other way around. *deeper sigh*
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 02:42 am (UTC)Clearly they're reasoning from the conclusion, because even a moment's thought would disprove the delete-repost thing -- it'd have a different story ID # and the old links would break. But that would mean they were WRONG and that can't be, so clearly you are a lying liar of a pre-teen brat.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 03:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 02:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 02:17 am (UTC)*A historian of science and technology who has worked as both a professor and an editor is not someone who will ever pass up a chance to correct a bad line of reasoning and explain, in excruciating detail, exactly how and why each error is wrong. *wry*
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-23 05:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 02:06 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 08:47 pm (UTC)The stupid, it burns. I bet none of them can write their way out of a paper bag.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-24 09:53 pm (UTC)