4th letter to ff.net
Oct. 25th, 2012 11:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
edenfallingTo whom it may concern,
I have recently been party to an argument with the group Critics United (http://www.fanfiction.net/forum/Critics-United/78623/) over the interpretation of a second of fanfiction.net's rules on forbidden content. The rule in question is #5, which says:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, second person/you based, Q&As, and etc.
This is a poorly worded rule, which is the source of the dispute. As I interpret it, the rule forbids INTERACTIVE content, and second person is only forbidden when it is used to create interactivity, as when the reader is addressed as if she or he were an insert into the story. When second person is used as a simple point of view technique, akin to first and third person, to convey the viewpoint of a named canon character, that is not interactive and therefore not forbidden. The members of Critics United argue, on the other hand, that ALL uses of second person are forbidden -- either because the rule can be read to say so, or because they think second person is somehow inherently interactive.
The rule is so poorly worded that your own admins disagree on its interpretation. For example, in response to the first round of complaints, an admin agreed with my interpretation and deleted two reviews from members of Critics United. In response to a third review from Critics United and a second complaint from me, no action was taken. And in response to a fourth review from Critics United and a third complaint from me, my story was deleted. So as you can see, one of your admins thinks I am correct in my understanding of your rule, while another thinks Critics United are correct.
This inconsistency helps create a poisonous and fearful atmosphere on the site, as can be seen by the way some anonymous users followed me from my fanfiction.net page to my livejournal (http://edenfalling.livejournal.com/) and began posting misogynistic slurs in my journal, and by the way a group that may or may not go by the name Eliminator (though I would take that with a grain of salt, since it was reported to me on my livejournal by an anonymous troll; Eliminator may well be a single person with far too much time on his hands) has now begun targeting me on your site with abusive and misogynistic anonymous reviews and claims that they have reported me for violations -- even of stories that do not use second person!
Here is an example of one such review:
Elizabeth Culmer,
A new review has been posted to your story.
Story: Waking Persephone
Chapter: 1. Chapter 1
From: Lifequasher (Guest)
-------------------
Lifequasher:If you're 30 years old I'm the president of Australia, you bitch.
Homestuck is not for the 30 crowd, you whiny whore. That shitty webcomic is
for emo teenagers under 16 who cry when they spill their milk.
Go keep sucking your racoon's dick, you bestiality addicted bitch.
You're a dirty little liar who likes it in the ass.
Reported.
Lifequasher
Founder and lord and master of Eliminator.
You can't report this review bitch, I didn't sign in so that you can't stalk
me like you do those CU assholes.
-------------------
Do not reply to this email.
FanFiction.Net Messaging Service
Please note the misogyny, the sexually abusive language, and the irrational hatred directed toward the entire Homestuck fandom. Please also note that the story in question -- "Waking Persephone" (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8637148/1/) -- is not in second person and does not violate any other content rules either. This is the sort of behavior that results from unclear site rules and inconsistent enforcement.
I respectfully suggest that the wording of the content rule in question be changed to eliminate this uncertainty. If you intend to forbid all use of second person narrative, with no exceptions, it would be simple to add a 7th content guideline to that effect, like this:
7. All use of second person narrative (you-based POV).
If you only intend to forbid second person narrative when used in an interactive fashion, it would be equally simple to reword the existing rule along the following lines:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, Q&As, and etc. (Second person/you-based narrative may be a warning sign of interactivity but is not necessarily interactive on its own.)
In either case, the rules would then be clear and all parties would know where they stand, instead of being dependent on the inconsistent ways each individual admin reads and interprets the current poorly worded rule.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer (http://www.fanfiction.net/u/461224/Elizabeth_Culmer)
Member since 2003
---------------
ETA: I would like to state, for the record, that the reason given for the removal of my story was this: Main reason for removal: "Not allowed: interactive, chat/script, real person, mst, and etc." Note that there is no mention of second person whatsoever! Me, Myself, and Die did not use chat/script format, was not about a real person, was not an MST fic, and was NOT INTERACTIVE, under any standard definition of interactivity.
So why was it removed?
Because the forbidden content rule is badly written. Therefore the rule should be clarified.
I have recently been party to an argument with the group Critics United (http://www.fanfiction.net/forum/Critics-United/78623/) over the interpretation of a second of fanfiction.net's rules on forbidden content. The rule in question is #5, which says:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, second person/you based, Q&As, and etc.
This is a poorly worded rule, which is the source of the dispute. As I interpret it, the rule forbids INTERACTIVE content, and second person is only forbidden when it is used to create interactivity, as when the reader is addressed as if she or he were an insert into the story. When second person is used as a simple point of view technique, akin to first and third person, to convey the viewpoint of a named canon character, that is not interactive and therefore not forbidden. The members of Critics United argue, on the other hand, that ALL uses of second person are forbidden -- either because the rule can be read to say so, or because they think second person is somehow inherently interactive.
The rule is so poorly worded that your own admins disagree on its interpretation. For example, in response to the first round of complaints, an admin agreed with my interpretation and deleted two reviews from members of Critics United. In response to a third review from Critics United and a second complaint from me, no action was taken. And in response to a fourth review from Critics United and a third complaint from me, my story was deleted. So as you can see, one of your admins thinks I am correct in my understanding of your rule, while another thinks Critics United are correct.
This inconsistency helps create a poisonous and fearful atmosphere on the site, as can be seen by the way some anonymous users followed me from my fanfiction.net page to my livejournal (http://edenfalling.livejournal.com/) and began posting misogynistic slurs in my journal, and by the way a group that may or may not go by the name Eliminator (though I would take that with a grain of salt, since it was reported to me on my livejournal by an anonymous troll; Eliminator may well be a single person with far too much time on his hands) has now begun targeting me on your site with abusive and misogynistic anonymous reviews and claims that they have reported me for violations -- even of stories that do not use second person!
Here is an example of one such review:
Elizabeth Culmer,
A new review has been posted to your story.
Story: Waking Persephone
Chapter: 1. Chapter 1
From: Lifequasher (Guest)
-------------------
Lifequasher:If you're 30 years old I'm the president of Australia, you bitch.
Homestuck is not for the 30 crowd, you whiny whore. That shitty webcomic is
for emo teenagers under 16 who cry when they spill their milk.
Go keep sucking your racoon's dick, you bestiality addicted bitch.
You're a dirty little liar who likes it in the ass.
Reported.
Lifequasher
Founder and lord and master of Eliminator.
You can't report this review bitch, I didn't sign in so that you can't stalk
me like you do those CU assholes.
-------------------
Do not reply to this email.
FanFiction.Net Messaging Service
Please note the misogyny, the sexually abusive language, and the irrational hatred directed toward the entire Homestuck fandom. Please also note that the story in question -- "Waking Persephone" (http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8637148/1/) -- is not in second person and does not violate any other content rules either. This is the sort of behavior that results from unclear site rules and inconsistent enforcement.
I respectfully suggest that the wording of the content rule in question be changed to eliminate this uncertainty. If you intend to forbid all use of second person narrative, with no exceptions, it would be simple to add a 7th content guideline to that effect, like this:
7. All use of second person narrative (you-based POV).
If you only intend to forbid second person narrative when used in an interactive fashion, it would be equally simple to reword the existing rule along the following lines:
5. Any form of interactive entry: choose your adventure, Q&As, and etc. (Second person/you-based narrative may be a warning sign of interactivity but is not necessarily interactive on its own.)
In either case, the rules would then be clear and all parties would know where they stand, instead of being dependent on the inconsistent ways each individual admin reads and interprets the current poorly worded rule.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Culmer (http://www.fanfiction.net/u/461224/Elizabeth_Culmer)
Member since 2003
---------------
ETA: I would like to state, for the record, that the reason given for the removal of my story was this: Main reason for removal: "Not allowed: interactive, chat/script, real person, mst, and etc." Note that there is no mention of second person whatsoever! Me, Myself, and Die did not use chat/script format, was not about a real person, was not an MST fic, and was NOT INTERACTIVE, under any standard definition of interactivity.
So why was it removed?
Because the forbidden content rule is badly written. Therefore the rule should be clarified.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-26 01:26 pm (UTC)I simply had to give up and find other places to post. My fics are still up on ff.net, but the only place that has all my fics in one place is AO3.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-27 04:29 am (UTC)There's an awful lot of fic I never bothered crossposting to ff.net in the first place -- short things, self-indulgent stuff, etcetera -- and for obvious reasons (chatlogs and ACTUAL interactivity) I haven't even tried to post most of my Homestuck fic there at all. (Even if I think their rules are silly, it's a private site and the owners have the right to decide what kinds of content they want to allow.) I am just annoyed about this particular issue because the rule in question is so poorly worded, and it would be SO EASY to fix that and remove any source of confusion. And you know, if ff.net decided to unequivocally ban all use of second person whatsoever, I'd removed my second person stories from the site. I just refuse to do that while the rule people are interpreting to mean that does not, so far as I can tell, actually ban what these people think it bans. *sigh*
I already have a bunch of stories up on AO3, and I put up a couple of my really old HP fics last night. I think I will continue that archiving effort Saturday and Sunday. A handful of stories per day won't be too much bother to upload.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-27 05:21 am (UTC)You can transfer fics wholesale from ff.net into AO3 in case you didn't know. That made transferring my fics over a lot easier though it did lead to a hilarious exchange with a reviewer over whether or not I owed it to them to remove the author's notes that were at the start of each chapter (as it was set up in ff.net nearly ten years ago) (the answer being that if they have the free time to edit 50+ fics to perfection, I am very envious of their free time).
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-27 08:07 pm (UTC)Just a question to the author: If the story was removed in the end by the admins then wouldn't that make this little tirade/crusade/ whatever a moot point? Would them saying it was removed because it wasn't allowed answer your question if "you" based stories are allowed or not?
I have a very hard time seeing why you're so confused over it when it says "second person/you" stories in the rules. Can you not tell that it's a blanket rule that is generalized and not a specific one as you are believing it is?
(no subject)
Date: 2012-10-28 03:48 am (UTC)And no, the removal of "Me, Myself, and Die" does not resolve the issue, for two reasons. First, as I have pointed out, ff.net's own admins apparently disagree on the interpretation of the rule -- one admin removed two CU reviews (thus agreeing with me), while another removed my story (thus agreeing with CU). Obviously a rule that the administrators themselves cannot interpret consistently is a poorly written rule and should be rewritten to clarify the muddy wording. Second, the reason given by the admin who removed my story -- which you can see above in the text of this post, btw -- is "Not allowed: interactive, chat/script, real person, mst, and etc." Please note that this is a conflation of FOUR separate content rules without a single direct reference to the use of second person narrative, which is the specific issue under contention.
Until I get a clear answer from ff.net about their position on second person (and no, a statement about interactivity in general does not count, unless an admin says outright something to the effect of, "Fanfiction.net's official position is that all use of second person narrative is inherently interactive," which I think would be a blatantly silly and misguided interpretation of both second person and interactivity, but the site owners can define words however they wish so long as the definitions are clearly stated) I continue to stand by my interpretation of rule 5: namely, that it forbids INTERACTIVE content, but the use of second person narrative is only forbidden when used as part of an interactive story. Which "Me, Myself, and Die" was not.
I hope that explains my position.