:headdesk:

[burntcopper]

Ah, the fun of people not quite comprehending you and the way you normally post/speak/rant, etc when they were linked or someone on their flist took offence...

Remember the headers rant? It got linked a few places as 'amusing to read'. Unfortunately, the people I named also saw it and took it the wrong way. And a couple of their mates came over a bit defensive and in mood for 'what did you say to hurt my friend?' (whilst also agreeing with me on the headers subject) Explained, they went 'oh' (it also seems they didn't get the Dickens comparison), and hopefully it's got back to the original people. hoo boy. They can't link me to the other person because the post was locked.

note to self and other people : I have ridiculously thick skin, communicate by snark and sarcasm, and expect others to do so too. And always, always cite specific examples. And yes, what I say about you in my journal I will be quite happily telling you to your face in front of the entirety of wembley arena. if anything I'm less vicious in my journal.

:ponders what kind of comments I'd get if I announced an anonymeme one day: it occurs to me that most of them have already told me their issues to my face.

Comments

[fairyd123.livejournal.com]

I did think you were somewhat brave to post that unlocked! Not because I necessarily disagreed with your comments about what ensures that you never click on a header (whoring for comments or "i'm really crap at titles me" being the ones that make me hit the backbutton faster than you can blink)but because people are so sensitive about their writing.

To be honest there are very few truly decent writers in the Torchwood fandom and even those I like have some very off days. But hey if you're going to offer your fic up to the public you have to have a thick enough skin not to get all desperately upset if someone offers up a critical comment or two.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

the thinness of skins sometimes leaves me going 'er, you do know this is *lj*, right?'

I wonder if it's worth one day doing a post of 'people I regularly read, and here are their main faults and pluses' as a sort of recs list...

[grondfic.livejournal.com]

*sigh*

I have one gripe with you. Why don't you Mutually-Friend? I've been on your Flist forever. You know me for-real (only maybe you don't ..... Silver Arrow in Swindon where you looked like Xena-warriorprincess at the Sunday-night 80s disco; and doubtless the consequential Legend stuff - I'm a part-time part of AddiesFaction). TDIR? RoS slash on your pre-LJ website? .....

[jane-somebody.livejournal.com]

Heh, She's never friended me either, though I've listed her forever - doubtless on account of her being more interesting than me! (Er, not fishing, I mean really, other people's interesting lives/opinions etc is why I escape into LJ) - but she's never minded me hanging around. People have different friending policies is all. *shrug*

[tirinar.livejournal.com]

Could be wrong but I think she mentioned this on journal ages ago - Friends list had to be culled because of a sheer lack of time to read, so she has a few that she reads whatever and a bundle more she checks in on as and when.

[jane-somebody.livejournal.com]

Yes, quite. Some people use filters to regularly read only a core group of a large friends list, some prefer to only list as friends those they have time to read regularly - arguably this is better as people have a clearer idea of whether they're likely to be read or not, if that matters to them. But either way, different people do different things, and there's no reason anyone should be bothered by this either way; some say, and I see their point, the problem lies with the 'friends' terminology, which should be better understood as something more like 'reading list'. Heather knows I read her, has never minded my commenting, and is always polite in replying to me, so it's all cool ;-) I just wanted to clarify to the original commenter.

[jane-somebody.livejournal.com]

Oh dear. It seemed quite clear to me that in your original post you were saying two separate things: (1) that some authors you learn through experience whether their style/content/whatever was your cup of tea or not, but that (2) for authors you hadn't previously read so *didn't* know from experience, the headers were useful pointers for whether you wanted to try them or not. Thus the headers were warnings of general badfic tendencies, but the first examples were personal preference issues. I can understand though, if you were one of the people named or their friends, the proximity to the badfic thing might cause more of an emotional response and less of a clear reading of what you actually said. Glad it seems to be sorted out now.

[tirinar.livejournal.com]

"I have ridiculously thick skin, communicate by snark and sarcasm, and expect others to do so too."

This is the understatement of the year, tho since we've only just hit March I'm sure you'll do better later. When the next nuclear holocaust is announced I am hiding under your arse with the cockroaches, Dolly Parton, Keith Richards and a lifetime's supply of twinkies.
You are also my inspiration for each and every argument, discussion or debate I have, ever, because of it. I wouldn't have you any other way because you're far more entertaining like this.

Realising this comment is probably far too flattering I'll make it up in added snark at the next convention.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

are you using the twinkies to build a fort? I fear for your digestive system if you actually try to eat the things...

:shudders: god, can you imagine if people never used sarcasm? They'd actually talk about their feelings and be sympathetic and the ability to use metaphor would go out the window.