imzy

26 Aug 2016 11:18 pm
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (Default)
I have invitations. Wait, that's not all!

When I saw Aja retweeting official Imzy appealing for fandom signups, I went, "Who?" So I googled it. Google found an article that left me squinting a lot but basically conveyed that it is

  • A bit like Tumblr, except everything you follow is communities


  • Every post has threaded comments (but the threading only nests 3 deep so far. They intend to improve that in future)


  • Designed to allow "tipping" for posts - I assume the idea of this is for things like Patreon and Medium; one of their built-in post types is Podcast, so it makes sense for that too. This requires credit card info obvs. Potentially problematic fandom implications also obvs.


  • Designed to allow anon posting and linking of multiple aliases under one sign-in.


This is several of the big issues with Tumblr - communities and commenting - but maintaining the WYSIWYG interface of Tumblr; there are image posts too, although they don't look great right now.

Obviously, people are saying "What about the TOS? Are you going to start banning fandom for posting erotica?" and there's a post about that at /fail_fandom_anon over there (which seems to have some useful fandom-specific information and newbie tutorials and the like), here (viewable if you've got an account and are signed in). To quote relevant bits,

Strikethrough? Not going to be banned or deleted without warning

First, we’ve banned very few people, and only when they were explicitly and repeatedly violating our TOS. If we think you’re crossing a line, we’ll try to talk to you first. And even if you do get banned, you still have access to the entire site and all your content, you just can’t do anything new. When content is removed by a leader or staff, it is only removed from public view and is still accessible to you.

NSFW content? Erotic fanfic is okay. We don’t have a problem with this, as long as you make sure you’re still marking everything as NSFW and following the community’s guidelines. [...] Our community policy states that “we define pornography as imagery whose primary or sole purpose is sexual arousal.” Sometimes there is sexually explicit or otherwise graphic content that is a part of a story and is a crucial part of character and plot development in, say, a web comic. That should be okay. A lot of fan art I think tends to fall into this category. If you have fan art about a show, certain characters, even a romance, there will likely be some erotic art that comes up. That’s fine, in that context. This is about celebrating characters, a show, a story, a world, whatever else, and exploring them. And some erotic content just may come up as a part of that. But the erotic part of it is not the “sole or primary purpose.” A community dedicated to pornographic art, on the other hand, isn’t so cool.


This is a staffer answering questions, apparently. Not terrible, at least. It sounds like they are aiming to disallow porn spam and porn blogs, but not nsfw content when it pops up in fanwork comms (if they stick to that).

Anyway, I'm cautiously hopeful.

And I have 199 invites, because when you make an unrestricted community you get a big packet of them. So you can drop your email address in a private message to me if you want one, or you can use the request button on this page (joining the community in question is not required, it'll just get namechecked in the invitation mail)(feel free to join if you like Poirot, though).

As yet there is no major content there, but it might be worth your time to namesquat just in case.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (HALP)
Last night as I was lying in bed I suddenly realized that all these fic where people are colorblind until they meet their soulmates (so far in my experience) have completely failed to consider the kinds of effects such a large colorblind population would have on design, industry, and the market.

Consider: What if, say, 70% of the adult population is colorblind? People who can see color, and hence perceive when things clash, are now a minority. Probably one that spends a lot of time wincing at clothes, houses, and everything in the world designed for shades of gray. If color vision is that rare, there's no need to make special provisions to run things for them. Checking that things match is probably a kind of specialty service and most people wouldn't bother to care, which means that the pigment industry will use whichever dyes or paints are most effective for cost/wear to get the shade of gray in their design... which might or might not clash horribly with each other. At the same time, 30% is high enough to make the fantasy of achieving one's soulmate attainable, so color vision is something people freely fantasize about, so color-matching markups can be presented as planning ahead, or a way to appear indistinguishable from the privileged to other color viewers (I'm not quite sure how you'd go about appearing to have color vision to people who don't have it...) Point is, this situation is complex.

And then what if the likelihood of meeting one's soulmate is pretty high, and around 10% of the adult population is colorblind? So the world is set up for people with color vision and now the colorblind are a marginalized group. If you can afford to, you pay extra to make sure your shit matches, so the poor can't, and now color matching is a status marker, which makes paying for it more important for people who can afford it...

...and either way, there's gonna be services set up, or maybe sections of stores where everything already matches, or color codes on clothing tags...

...where's the worldbuilding? Where's the dystopia?????
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (workout)
Reading a variant of Undercover as Gay where the POV character is gung-ho on the idea and pushing the Romantic Interest, who is obviously wary. It only works as a rom-com of misunderstanding because of dramatic irony, particularly the fanon that Romantic Interest has been in unrequited love with POV character for years, and that interpretation makes it obvious to the reader that his wariness is to do with giving himself away.

But it doesn't really make POV character's behavior okay and wouldn't even if he did share that understanding. All you have to do is flip it and imagine the reticent character to be a romantically UNinterested woman to see how gross it is:

"You MUST accept me going undercover as your romantic partner and all that that entails, even though that wasn't what you signed up for when you agreed to the assignment, because I must PROTECT you! Your discomfort is unfortunate and I'm understanding about it, but we just have to push past it for your own good, because it wouldn't be SAFE to go undercover without making sure we've practiced dating/overnighting together!"

It's possible that I am slightly overstating the degree of pushiness involved. He has checked the Romantic Interest's comfort level verbally and promised to let R.I. control the level of intimacy. BUT the internal narration is very concerned with his sensitivity to the subtle signs of R.I.'s discomfort (no doubt because he has to eventually correctly decipher its real cause) and his internal attitude to it is self-righteous. He never even considers that shoving his way into the assignment like that wasn't the morally right and logically necessary thing to do.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (studying)
(Written on Twitter before I realized it was becoming long-winded. Edited to remove abbreviations)

LOL, so our current theme for vocabulary/etc. in Finnish class is literature. Every time a film adaptation comes up, 3-5 ppl yell "The book is always better!"

I'm like... 'Aww, look at you living in that childish book-lover's world!'

I mean, I used to think that too, sure, but the world also contains shitty books & films that improve on them.

The world even contains good(ish?) books that are still better films than they were books.

And then it contains even more complicated adaptations like HP and LOTR.

LOTR was the subject of the last shouts and I just zipped my lips, but I will fight you re: the use of 'better' there. Better in which way?

Movies and books have hundreds of characteristics and each one has strengths and weaknesses.

Maybe the adaptation lost a lot but made a couple of significant improvements (more female characters), while still being problematic (racism).

Are you really gonna cover all of that with a lazy, simplistic, inherently problematic term like 'better'/'worse'?


As an opinionated kid bookworm who didn't particularly like movies and tv as a medium, it was easy for me to also get to the "Books are always better" idea. But as time went by I grew out of it, not only because I read excerpts of Twilight and The DaVinci Code and saw the associated (laughable, but definitely less obviously awful) movies.

I also grew out of it because I came to better understand how 'better' and 'best' in this context assumes that these terms can be empirical and universal, which implies that everyone gets and wants the same things from their entertainment. (This is obviously not possible. I don't even always want the same things from my entertainment and I'm only one person.)

(In fact I was pleased when, in brief class discussions along the lines of "the best book you've ever read" and "your favorite book", nobody agreed to the questions - everyone who spoke acknowledged that these are a matter of opinion and circumstances.)

But somehow when it comes to book vs. movie this gets thrown out the window. It's obviously true that when it comes to an adaptation, there's always the question of interpretation, and you can probably always argue, therefore, that something was lost - whether that's actual content, in the rewrites, or the mood, or the creator's intent (I'm for death of the author, but people can and do argue on that basis, and that's also legit if that's what they want from an adaptation).

Still, though, you shouldn't judge an adaptation only as an adaptation (or a transformative work only in relation to its canon). It exists in conversation with its source text, just like any other fanwork, but also in conversation with other texts (and movies). It can have things to say of its own, which it can say well or not. And it can ultimately reach a different audience, and have a different effect on them, sometimes solely by the change in medium. It can draw that audience to reading the source text when they otherwise might not have, or it can lead a reader to regard the source text in a new light.

It's fair to downgrade the Lord of the Rings movies on the scale of canonical accuracy, as they certainly depart in many ways, if that's the rubric you want to use. But if all you want is the exact content of the book, why would you ever approach any adaptation in the first place?

If you judge the movies on remaining generally faithful to the books but under 15 hours in length, then many people have argued that they achieve better-than-average success (and, in my opinion, some moments of magic) when compared to other literary adaptations. I also think that they succeed at that, although that, obviously, is debatable. On the other hand I also think that Tolkien had way more excuse for the amount of racism in his books than Jackson had for the amount in his movies, but I doubt that was in any of my classmates' minds.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (stfu)
Yet another thought that I only realized after the fact was too long for Twitter


(3:04) Posting on DW feels so weird and artificial when I'm used to Twitter and Tumblr.

(3:05) It feels like making an Event out of what seems like just more of the same disconnected babble that is always in my head.

(3:06) Like in order to qualify for a Blog Entry, it should be a position piece, or a reminiscence, not just 20x too long for Twitter.

(3:06) But I can't start posting these things on Tumblr, because Tumblr is like 98:2 noise: signal and the tagging system is shit.

(3:07) ... Not to mention the COMMENTING system, geez. I am not comfortable having personal interactions or conversations there. Awkward & weird.

These tweets on Storify



The gap between Twitter, Tumblr, and DW is long stuff that doesn't seem all that important but which you nonetheless might want comments on and/or would like indexed and taggable.

...

Dreamwidth's (or rather, LJ-style) calendar-based archive browsing, the ability to bundle and rename tags and to label memories, and the nested commenting and notification/tracking features on DW are too useful to me as a blog owner to just abandon.

And for fandom purposes, LJ-style comment pages, notification and tracking features, and the community concept are similarly indispensible, until we get another good non-instantaneous mailing list/messageboard substitue.

But the filtering functionality you can get on Tumblr with Xkit or even just Tumblr savior, not to mention the ease of posting and embedding media and the reblog+comment concept, are still irresistable - and that doesn't even touch on the ability to search and browse across the site by tags, which is a huge boon to fandom.



What would the ideal solution have to look like, anyway? What do I even want? )
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (workout)
So I saw a remark on Pinboard that perfectly encapsulated my sense of 'WHY' when reading a lot of old fandom fic, and also about my own teeniefic: "hilariously unsexy".

"Hilariously unsexy" certainly doesn't cover everything unique about old fandoms or teeniefic; it just captured the thought that had been on the tip of my tongue as well after reading a lot of old Legolas/Gimli fic (and also the problem with the ones I wrote) (not ALL Legolas/Gimli by any means, just a lot of it).

Obviously, writing sex isn't the only thing that gets better about one's writing with practice, but I started thinking about how that is true of all my teeniefic. Trying to write better sex is, I think, something many of us have struggled with, and I often got hung up at that bit in a story and went back to look at my older ones over the years, trying to analyze which bits I'd done right and wrong. So while it wasn't a straight upward trend in my own eyes - there are some I liked better and some I hate completely - in general, it got better.

I was musing that I actually remember the first time I read many of the stories that now appear to have glaring weaknesses in the sex sections, and I clearly remember liking them or loving them at the time. I remember finding them hot at the time.

"So in my defense, I also genuinely liked reading hilariously unsexy sex at the time," I mused.

But it wasn't that. It wasn't like I thought, "I'm going to read some sexy sex and I love that. Now I'm going to read unsexy sex and I like that too." (Not ruling that out. I do it sometimes. Getting the giggles isn't necessarily a detriment.)

Ultimately I realized that at the time, I couldn't tell the difference between sexy and hilariously unsexy sex scenes (has the word 'sex' lost all meaning for anyone else or should I type it a few more times?). I'm not sure it actually occurred to me that the world contained both of those things. I literally could discern no difference among sex scenes; they were essentially all the same to me, although of course, sometimes I'd like one better or worse, and sometimes I wouldn't like one, but that was usually a matter of squicks or wandering bodyparts or unreadable punctuation - certainly not a matter of unsexiness.

And then I realized something else. The reason the sex scenes in slash mostly all seemed quite sexy to me was that in comparison to the sex scenes I'd been exposed to until that point, they were. Read more... )

Even sex that is hilariously unsexy by fandom standards is usually sexier than the average published sex scene.

Only after reading tons of slash, for a long time, did the shapes of 'good' and 'bad' emerge from the mist. It was sort of the way I learned to distinguish between Swedish and Finnish vowel sounds that don't exist (or are grouped together as only one sound) in English. It took a lot of listening for that, just as it took a lot of reading during which 'unsexy' and 'sexy' sex writing became clearer and clearer.

And now, of course, the difference between "yö" and "öy", and between the various sounds covered in Swedish by Å, O, and U, seem blindingly obvious, just as bad sex writing does, but I can still clearly remember when it just sounded like Wax and my teacher were repeating the same exact sound over and over again and expecting me to hear the difference, like Lina's diction coach in Singin' in the Rain.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (interrupted)
You know how sometimes you read an entire fic, possibly having followed it with steadily increasing impatience, and then when it's finally over the plot isn't actually resolved? But you didn't actually know that first, or even know that it was going to have a sequel, until you got to the end? SURPRISE!WIP. :|

I was following a WIP last summer with bated breath to the last chapter, only to discover that she didn't resolve the romance plot and in fact cliffhung it. So I vowed not to read the sequel until it was actually FINISHED. Six months later I checked and it finally was! So I read it yesterday. AND SHE FAILED TO RESOLVE THE ROMANCE PLOT AGAIN.

So now there's apparently a third novel. OR WHO KNOWS HOW MANY.

This is why it's actually kind of nice to be given information like "PART 1 OF THE __ TRILOGY" or "1/120". That's always better than 1/? or the much worse story that says it's complete but is LYING.

My mom was burned so badly by Roger Zelazny ending the 3rd book of the first Amber Trilogy (both of the Amber trilogies are actually 5 books long, thanks a lot, Zelazny) in a cliffhanger that she boycotted him forever (after finding out how Amber ended) and also started reading the last page, or last chapter, of most books before the middle.
cimorene: (is this thing on?)
As I continue watching This Old House - I've now made it back to 2009 - I occasionally tweet observations. Most of those are mostly-not-serious ones about slashing (it just is unnatural to watch this much of one show without shipping something!). Fortunately I haven't had space to include a hashtag every time (I use these to collect observations later when I want to make a blog post about it), because last night one of the producers replied to me. <.<

The host visited a historic house that had been made into a museum and the architect who was guiding the tour explained that as they stepped over the threshold into the museum they were "literally stepping back" 200 years into the past, to which the host replied something like "So this is a literal time machine..."

I tweeted some classic pedantry in response, but mainly because this is one of those rare instances of 'literally' usage that (figuratively) really makes life worth living (others have included 'my heart was literally in my throat' and 'literally jumping out of my skin', but this is even better really). Talk about your unexpected genre crossovers.

So the producer's reply was just that they didn't have the budget to rent a DeLorean.

I guess I'm just used to popular shows with big fandoms where you can't really expect a reply even when you directly @ someone, let alone when you just mention the show by name. But while This Old House may have a dedicated fan following, I can see how most of it would not be very active on Twitter...
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (dangerous)
I realized I wanted to preserve this meta for posterity a bit belatedly. I wrote it on Tumblr a few days ago in defense of the ethics of Derek's actions over s1-2 of Teen Wolf in reply to some comments. That's not the only thing I said, but it's the reason I want to save the post, anyway.

Anyway, affectingly:cimness: Allison found her inner strength, tested her relationships, and… 19 Aug 2012. Teen Wolf meta, spoilers through all of season 2. Trigger warnings: references to mental breakdown and alcoholism, murder and serial killers.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (kinky!)
This post is going around Tumblr:

“We’ve certainly made some hints to the possibility of Stiles being bisexual.”

Jeff Davis (x)

original post


And my wife [personal profile] waxjism commented

#when I was a teenager #no one on TV was like me #I didn’t even know bisexuality was a thing #outside of crappy porn


#and that's why it took me #until I was 23 #to know how it was possible #to not be gay and not be straight



My parents had some gay and trans friends when I was an infant and there were a handful of gay and lesbian people in my Unitarian Universalist church over the years when I was a kid - friendly acquaintances but not actually family friends, at least until I was teenaged and got to know my dad's work bff who was gay (he wasn't a dinner party friend because his partner lived 5 hrs' drive away in Atlanta and he spent all his weekends there). ANYWAY, I never knew our queer acquaintances very well (and always was a bit starstruck and curious but too shy to like seek them out and talk to them especially), and I always kind of felt that queer people in general were a lot cooler than me so I always felt a bit let down that I was not as cool as them, and I vaguely felt that if I were that cool surely I would have known about it. I can't actually remember a time before I knew about bisexuality either.

So anyway, I was really lucky in terms of knowing about queer people and knowing some of them. But gay people still were Other to me because they're so fucking invisible and so othered in culture/media that the overwhelming message that "these people are other" was actually able to drown out the completely contradictory facts in my brain (of identifying with them quite strongly obviously myself, hence the curiosity and sort of wistful admiration or whatever)(and also of actually knowing them personally and uh, knowing they were ordinary, non-other people)! Maybe if I'd seen them (us?) in the media more I would have figured it out before age 19? I'm not really sure. But hey, even if not, it still would have been nice.

My liberal parents did their best, but to be exposed to anything gay or bi in the media you would usually pretty much have to go hunting for it. They own thousands of sff books that overflow their whole house, but after decades of voracious reading they came up with a list of probably fewer than 10 gay-protagonist sff books when I asked them a few years ago. Partly this might be them not necessarily remembering the titles/authors for all the ones they've read, not having had a particular interest until ten years ago.

I kind of wanted to write a conclusion but then my brain sort of wandered off. Hopefully tomorrow this will still look like everything I wanted to say.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (kinky!)
I've posted meta on Tumblr twice in the last few days. I used to think I would always keep it here because Dreamwidth is the superior platform, but at the time it seemed natural to put it there because that's where the fandom is active (and the conversation is already happening).

  • Against Argent Apologia, 8 Aug 2012. Teen Wolf spoilers through 2x11. Trigger warnings: domestic violence, animal harm (not graphic). This was the result of one too many people excusing a character's fairly shockingly violent (that is: BAD) actions for various Reasons, and me getting irritated and my wife getting triggered due to her personal traumas and flailing wordlessly which is what she does when triggered. I'm better able to articulate thoughts about it even though we are generally of the same mind, because her trauma is the actual deaths of two members of her immediate family and my dad only ended up in a wheelchair.


  • Teen Wolf and strong women, 10 Aug 2012. Teen Wolf spoilers through 2x11, trigger warnings: TW s2 spoilers ). This one was just a comment that got way out of hand but this is something I care about and I wanted to save it for posterity, and also to put it in its own post because I kiiiiinda rambled on lengthily and a bit tangentially and that just didn't need to be floating around on the bottom of someone else's reblogged photoset? And after s2 I'm probably going to have a longer followup post sometime.


I feel like I should have an icon of a wolf shirt for this fandom but I worry that it wouldn't be clear what it was once it was shrunk that small...
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (sproing)
There's board elections coming up for the OTW and some unfunny business emerging. I have seen comments to the effect that people *would* have considered involvement/not shunning the name of OTW and spreading malicious sniping about AO3 but now that they've seen how extra-wanky it supposedly is they should instead run away. But honestly, OTW's just a large volunteer organization having a periodic but by no means unprecedented flare-up of dysfunction and infighting due to conflicting views and growth/change, and that isn't so different from other such organizations. Every now and then everybody involved wants to rip their hair out and they try to work that shit out and the only way to do that is for members to continue to push for what they believe in. It's not a special evil unique to the OTW. ) The people I see posting meta about this are doing their best: honestly airing their thoughts and talking to each other and sometimes having large alcoholic or tannin-laden drinks, which looks like an exemplary handling of the situation.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (tea)
As ticked off as I am at Delicious, I'm still prepared to be won back over (until something better comes along) if they can get their act together and restore functionality in a decent time-frame... as long as Pinboard remains paying-only and Diigo continues to censor. (It's not entirely a matter of which one is the most feature-rich: ultimately I will settle wherever is the most fandom-populous, probably; in the meantime I'm saving my bookmarks on AO3, since I've read that Diigo has a habit of failing to export bookmarks for backup.)

  • Delicious fixed / tags, so you can now browse recent or popular pairing bookmarks by tag. Of course, this won't be as useful if everyone who has left in the past week stays gone.


  • The 'results for TAG' page, which comes with recent and popular tabs, does show more than 10 tags at a time and does let you page backwards.


  • It doesn't show you who saved the each link on the Recent page anymore, because it has instead created what I would call a 'collapsed view': each URL in the system is displayed only once on the page, in reverse order of how recently it was saved. You can easily see how popular it was, but without the notes field, you can't see the summary/notes, which is a LOT less information about the story:



    In contrast, Diigo's feed is like the old Delicious's in that it shows each person's bookmark separately and also displays their notes.


  • Not only is it still impossible to see which tags were applied by which bookmarker on the individual link/url page, but you also can't see when anyone bookmarked the link anymore, as far as I can tell, either from the tag page (which used to break the feed into saved-on dates) or the link page (which used to display time next to each bookmarker's comments and tags).

    Diigo's link page displays tags and timestamps with each bookmarker's info, much like the old Delicious's did. It also displays a snapshot of the entire page so you can actually read it from inside the link page as well as easily click through to the link. On the down side, I could see this resulting in people accidentally bookmarking the link page instead of the link. I checked, and the Diigolet bookmarklet doesn't do anything to prevent this. side-by-side snapshots )


  • The 'related tags' sidebar is also present on the tag page (recent or popular), ordered by frequency, but no longer displaying a count. (As you probably recall, there would formerly have been a number next to each of the other tags.)

    On the other hand, Diigo has no related tags sidebar. It does display everyone's tags on their bookmarks, though, so it is still possible to manually enter other tags to filter the results further.


  • Relatedly, [personal profile] kaigou is collecting a feature wishlist for the ideal fannish bookmarking service, which some people are now referring to as fic.titio.us. What's on your wishlist? - Go check out the suggested features and vote for the important ones, if you are interested in/would like to make use of such a project!
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (i want to know everything)
1. Upload an icon. There is actually quite a good reason to upload a user icon (ideally the one you use everywhere else, if you're the sort who does that):




Without subscriptions, most of us will be using these pages - the Recent/Popular feed page for each tag (these follow the same format as Delicious but with _ in place of /, eg above www.diigo.com/tag/thor_loki). The red circle in the first screencap shows a feature that Delicious didn't have: it ranks the users of the tag according to frequency. The second picture shows actual size.

When you hover over one of the little grey generic headshot-square-icons, a pop-up will tell you the name of the person it represents. But the icon would make it a lot easier! If you're flipping back and forth between your favorite tags, you might notice someone who shares your taste if their user picture shows up in all of them, for example.

2. Filter multiple tags with a space in between. Not just in your own bookmarks (where it tells you to), but on the site overall, particularly the tag pages:



This is something I do often: search for [pairing]+au. That was how it worked on delicious; on Diigo, you just type both tags with a space between in the box at the top. The URL, as you can see, substitutes the standard %20 for a space.

3. Say goodbye to subscriptions. Personally, I added a folder to my browser bookmarks and then bookmarked all my most frequently visited tag pages, but I anticipate leaning more heavily on the network too once I have spent some more time looking around and adding more people to mine.

4. Say goodbye to tag bundles. I'm not sure how to cope with this yet: I have way too many tags to just browse without the aid of the fandom and pairing bundles. I'm thinking I will have to set up an index page on my website or journal. Anyone else have any solutions/suggestions for that?
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (HALP)
Delicious is currently non-functional. [livejournal.com profile] kronos999 investigated the features and lack thereof and lays out the horror in more detail, but lowlights include

  • Names of other people to save a bookmark are no longer associated with the tags they gave it at the url page

  • Network is gone (in its place is a list of links to people you follow, but you have to visit their pages individually)

  • Tag subscriptions are gone

  • When filtering by tag, you can only see the latest 10 results for each tag(-combination). There is no ability to page back.

  • Searching the entire site by tag is supposed to work, but apparently isn't necessarily (even if the tag in question doesn't contain a special character), and the results are sorted funny.


Not unrelatedly, Diigo censors tags by automatically privatizing bookmarks with keywords like 'porn' or 'sexy' attached.

And it's nice that the people at Pinboard are fandom-friendly, but here's the thing. I already pay for journaling. That isn't a big deal. We could do it. The problem is that what I want, and what I think a lot of us want, and what delicious was close to achieving, was a fairly fandom-universal option, a social network of fandom links that was open to everybody. And a fee threshold is simply too high to be that universal solution.

I mean, it's hard enough to get fandom people to migrate away from a place that's spit in our faces as many times as Livejournal without also adding any other causes for reluctance to the mix (rather poetically, the fandom delicious community, Deliciously Mad, is still on livejournal).

I haven't been able to export my bookmarks from delicious for the past few days (although I have full access to my account!). I'd been figuring the exporter was just overloaded with everyone else jumping ship; but now I seem to see that other people have been exporting successfully. Now I'm wondering if the problem isn't simply that mine are timing out because I have 4,000+, which is more bookmarks than the average bear. IDK. Just hoping that the exporter starts working for me again soon, unless someone has another suggestion. (I saw from [personal profile] mecurtin that the hostsfile workaround tested by [personal profile] brownbetty had failed for at least one person, so maybe stopped working? - and also since I can at least access my bookmarks on new!delicious (although not very well what with all the abovementioned lack of features), I presume they will eventually be capable of exporting them.

ETA: I got them using the api as per [personal profile] seperis's post here.


ETA on the subject of AO3's possibilities as a replacement for delicious

The short version is "They're miles and miles away from that", but we've been told here that it's being put back on the high priority list for them, which is something. Right now the functionality isn't ready, but if we're looking at long-term planning for a fandom-specific bookmarking solution anyway then it's worth considering one extremely useful feature of AO3:

TAG-WRANGLING.

And the tag wranglers already do that at AO3; sharing the tagging system for bookmarks and the archive would have the major advantage of eliminating the need to (for example) search for "mckay/sheppard", "john/rodney", and "sheppard/mckay", not to mention all the people who name their tags something like "pairing:sheppard/mckay" or "pairing:john.sheppard/rodney.mckay". Tag-wrangling lets the tagger call it Snarry or Cherik if they want to, and still lets the searcher find everything that's actually about the same two people.

And as someone who (used to) spend a HUGE amount of time on Delicious, with links in my bookmarks sidebar to over 20 "Recent [pairing] Bookmarks" and "Popular [pairing] Bookmarks" pages, I found the lack of canonical tags really, really annoying.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (batman)
These were thoughts I was having that didn't really fit on Twitter. I was all baffled and frustrated until I remembered I have a blog specifically for longer thoughts.

Anyway, this post is not a review, and not spoilery, because I haven't actually seen the new X movie (I don't watch Holocaust stuff; it's a thing), and that's not really my point anyway. But this morning I read the much-linked E! online movie review, Magneto and Professor X Had Sex at the Movies This Summer—Did You See It?. (That is a review. And it is spoilery.)

Basically the review contends that:

  1. X-men has always been an allegory for American race relations and civil rights, with Xavier representing Martin Luther King, Jr and Magneto representing Malcolm X (not going into a debate, but suffice to say I'd include the Black Panthers on Magneto's side of the allegory);
  2. and

  3. the new movie deliberately shifts the allegory to the struggle for gay rights instead.


I think she's right about the movie and its intentionality. She's also probably right that Xavier's "idealistic" position aligns with wanting to live in the closet, although obviously not exactly since he doesn't want to explicitly keep the X-men's powers a secret, while Erik's cape and helmet do certainly argue for her comparison to drag.

The thing is, the movie's set in the 1960s, when closeting was a not-unreasonable life choice, but it's speaking to today's civil rights struggle. And today the argument that out and proud would be harmful to the gay agenda our cause is a bit ludicrous.

I've seen state after state legalize gay marriage in the last 10 years; I'm out and I've gotten gay married in the state where my mom spent ½ her childhood. In a world where polling shows more than half of Americans support gay marriage and nobody but the Pentagon and McCain supports Don't Ask Don't Tell, the administration has just gone to bat against DOMA, and it was Republicans who pushed through New York's new gender-neutral marriage laws, the idea that we need to sit down and shut up and put away our Rupaul's Drag Race and our pride parades and prove we're just like them to get equality is not just obsolete; it's offensive. And Professor X is nothing but one giant tone argument.

So today Magneto's out-and-proud looks a lot more reasonable than Charles's quiet collaboration (admittedly 'kill them all' never looks reasonable, but 'full equality now or fuck you' probably shouldn't really be equated to 'kill them all'). Today, it's the Charleses in the Finnish government who were willing to sit down and coalitionize with the Christian Democrats at the price of promising no new rights for gay people who have dirty hands and I hope guilty consciences. They're the ones I couldn't see my conscience clear to working with or living with, not the Eriks who throw glitter on Newt Gingrich at book signings.

Which rather makes me even less sympathetic to Charles's position than I already was thanks to a) his enormous privilege, b) his douchiness, c) his moral flexibility combined with sanctimoniousness, and d) the fact that in the past movies Magneto's position was always the one aligned with observable reality and events.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (writing)
In Social Network RPF fandom, people have started using the term "Girlfriend-What-Girlfriend" to refer to the common crossfandom story type in which canon remains completely the same except that the BSOs (that's Beloved Slash Objects if anyone was confused) in focus no longer have real-life romantic attachments.

I've seen this abbreviated both GWG and GfWGf (I prefer the former).

My kneejerk reaction is "Of course!". We need a term for this, because this is a really common story type, on a par with PWP or UST. I'd love to see a world where this was a universal tag at AO3 and something that almost everyone in fandom tagged their bookmarks with on Delicious (or at least as much as they tagged them PWP or "preslash", which is sadly more common than "UST" even though they should really be using the latter).

And I've definitely never come across a quick and pithy term for this before. On the other hand, the SOs in question aren't always girlfriends. Off the top of my head, in fact, I'd be more likely to think of fandoms where it's used on wives (SPN RPS, for example). And the only reason it's not used more often on boyfriends/husbands is that I don't read a lot of het and there's a shocking dearth of canon gay characters to choose from. I've definitely seen it used for both Adam Lambert and Jack Harkness - Ianto-What-Ianto? - so it's obvious that in principle, the term should be gender-neutral.

A couple of things:

  1. Does anyone know the actual fandom origin of the term "Girlfriend-What-Girlfriend"? Or when it came about?

  2. Has anyone heard it before, or heard another concise term for the same thing in use elsewhere in fandom before?

  3. Can anyone think of something better to call it? ETA: [personal profile] cesare suggests NOSO (NoSO) for No Significant Others. Not as catchy, perhaps, but has an obvious advantage in clarity. Thoughts?
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (reading)
[personal profile] mirabella is so, so right about ebook piracy.

Now, you could make the point that every one of those thousand paperbacks has (presumably) already been bought once, and therefore represents a positive cash flow to the author at some point in the past; while the pirated e-books, by definition, are a commodity that has not resulted in cash flow, ever. This is, strictly speaking, true. But going from Point A - people are getting something for free that they really shouldn't be - to Point B - and therefore the author is being directly harmed by lost sales due to piracy - is like me saying the reason I'm not rich today is that everyone on Earth didn't send me twenty bucks for my birthday every year like my grandmother did. Worse, it's like me making a budget where I spend like every person on Earth is a potential source of twenty bucks every January 24th and then being surprised and pissed off when I come up short.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (uniform)
epic fail photos - Shopping Fail
see more funny videos


This display is probably found in drugstores throughout Fanon Land in the fall.
cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (kinky!)
I went to the movies with my wife [personal profile] waxjism and our Luddite Dr. of Theology buddy Sofia to see The Social Network, and we discussed the psychology of religion over coffee tea and determined that she feels about the Abrahamic God the way I feel about Spock (ie personally offended when other people mischaracterize him).

The Social Network, having been written by Aaron Sorkin, was full of angsty homoerotic tension and sharp banter and was very funny.

On our way out of the theater I accidentally punched a guy in the face while putting on my scarf because he was tall and walking immediately behind me.

Somehow on the way home my wife and I got into a loud argument about whether Bondage Pants are just bondage-inspired, or potentially of use for kink (I maintain that they can be used to hobble, even if not for actual suspension, so they still count, but Wax thinks they're not hardcore enough). While we were at a crosswalk yelling over each other on the subject Sofia had to sort of wave her arms to get our attention in order to tell us she was deviating from course to go to the grocery store.

When I got home I said, "They're already slashing this movie, I know. Let's check it out." (I always do that when I know someone's already slashing a movie I've seen, regardless of how much I liked the movie; I want to see what everyone else in fandom thought of it, you know?) So I sat down with my tea and pulled up AO3 rather than delicious for a change, navigated by fandom, and the first story to come up in the list was THIS:

It might have had a name by Sharksdontsleep
The Social Network

16 Oct 2010
Tags: No Archive Warnings Apply, Mark/Eduardo, Mark Zuckerberg, post-apocalypse, Time Travel
Summary: Mark travels through time, one minute per minute. 99 percent gen. Warning for mentions of violence, and the post-apocalypse.

Title from John Cheever's The Swimmer. Apologies for the pretension.
Words: 1,299 Chapters: 1/1 Comments: 4 Bookmarks: 1 Hits: 186


Okay. Okay.

FIRST HIT. TIME TRAVEL AND THE APOCALYPSE. APOLOGIES FOR PRETENSION.

I - like I SERIOUSLY LOVE YOU, fandom.

So that was my night. Spock/God?, Sorkinslash, punching tall people in the face, vociferous bondage debate, and the Magic Eight Ball of fandom turning up the AMAZING combination of Facebook/time travel/gay sex/the Apocalypse.

Profile

cimorene: A black-and-white vintage photograph of 1920s singer Helen Kane in profile, with a dubious, side-eye expression (Default)
Cimorene

Syndicate

RSS Atom

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
212223242526 27
28293031   

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Most Popular Tags

Page generated 28 Jun 2017 01:54 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios