That's good to know. It does bother me a bit how some people are saying they aren't being included, but aren't trying to be included either. Or those say they don't *want* to be included to the OTW should just fuck off.
My problem with saying that is...I don't necessarily want to be included (like I said, I haven't decided yet). But if they're misrepresenting my segments of fandom, I'm going to speak up as long as they claim to be representing those segments.
IMO, they should cut RPF out of their legal/advocacy stuff (it's on much firmer legal ground than FPF, for the most part, so it doesn't NEED to be included there) - welcome it on the archive and in the wiki, but so far I'm not seeing much understanding of the legal issues RPF does face, and I'm...undecided on whether I think they seem willing to learn. They listened to us whiners about "media fandom != all of fandom", but I'm still not convinced they're really listening, you know? Like, they changed that one thing but from where I'm sitting they're still making mistakes that say to me they missed our broader point, that RPF and media-based fandom aren't the same thing and can't be accurately represented using solely the terminology of one of those.
I've been told by an OTW committee member OTW isn't so much about "LOOK AT MEEEEE" as "if you're already looking this way, lemme turn on the light so you can see right"...but regardless, by their nature they'll be getting attention from outside sources, and if they're presenting inaccurate information about fandom, are they really serving their purpose well?
So whether or not I ultimately want to be involved with the organization, I don't think it's unfair of me to correct misinformation when I see it. I do think, however, there's a difference between correcting misinfo and bitching, and yeah, people whose comments boil down to "how dare you not do this this and this exactly my way, not that I'd be interested even if you did" would probably benefit from just taking their ball and going home.
BTW, how has the response to your "bitching" been? (Links are fine, since you said you had made some metafandom posts, which I will probably get around to *some time* when the holidays aren't taking up all my time). I'm curious as to how the OTW is handling things, since, for the most part, I've only had a chance to read a few people's reactions to all this.
From the actual OTW staff, it's generally been...pleasant, but somewhat dry and corporate. Lots of somewhat-meaningless PR babble and "I'll get back to you later with an official response". Which isn't all bad - it feels odd in a fannish space to be interacted with on a business level, but it certainly could be worse.
While I'm aware it's somewhat unfair of me to judge the organization by its supporters, I would like to mention the response from many OTWers has been...well, I mentioned in a friend's LJ my big problem with the OTWers I've had the more frustrating arguments with is it never seems to be enough to say "this language feels exclusive; were I coming upon this for the first time today, 'x' would leave me thinking I wasn't included", people expect justification, factual backup, fandom credentials, links to usage of x with intention to exclude, on and on and on to the point it feels less like an argument about the inclusivity of x and more like me on trial - as if my exclusion is somehow my fault.
I'll get you links...at some point, lol. I think I have a list saved somewhere :)
Re: OTW Part 1a
My problem with saying that is...I don't necessarily want to be included (like I said, I haven't decided yet). But if they're misrepresenting my segments of fandom, I'm going to speak up as long as they claim to be representing those segments.
IMO, they should cut RPF out of their legal/advocacy stuff (it's on much firmer legal ground than FPF, for the most part, so it doesn't NEED to be included there) - welcome it on the archive and in the wiki, but so far I'm not seeing much understanding of the legal issues RPF does face, and I'm...undecided on whether I think they seem willing to learn. They listened to us whiners about "media fandom != all of fandom", but I'm still not convinced they're really listening, you know? Like, they changed that one thing but from where I'm sitting they're still making mistakes that say to me they missed our broader point, that RPF and media-based fandom aren't the same thing and can't be accurately represented using solely the terminology of one of those.
I've been told by an OTW committee member OTW isn't so much about "LOOK AT MEEEEE" as "if you're already looking this way, lemme turn on the light so you can see right"...but regardless, by their nature they'll be getting attention from outside sources, and if they're presenting inaccurate information about fandom, are they really serving their purpose well?
So whether or not I ultimately want to be involved with the organization, I don't think it's unfair of me to correct misinformation when I see it. I do think, however, there's a difference between correcting misinfo and bitching, and yeah, people whose comments boil down to "how dare you not do this this and this exactly my way, not that I'd be interested even if you did" would probably benefit from just taking their ball and going home.
BTW, how has the response to your "bitching" been? (Links are fine, since you said you had made some metafandom posts, which I will probably get around to *some time* when the holidays aren't taking up all my time). I'm curious as to how the OTW is handling things, since, for the most part, I've only had a chance to read a few people's reactions to all this.
From the actual OTW staff, it's generally been...pleasant, but somewhat dry and corporate. Lots of somewhat-meaningless PR babble and "I'll get back to you later with an official response". Which isn't all bad - it feels odd in a fannish space to be interacted with on a business level, but it certainly could be worse.
While I'm aware it's somewhat unfair of me to judge the organization by its supporters, I would like to mention the response from many OTWers has been...well, I mentioned in a friend's LJ my big problem with the OTWers I've had the more frustrating arguments with is it never seems to be enough to say "this language feels exclusive; were I coming upon this for the first time today, 'x' would leave me thinking I wasn't included", people expect justification, factual backup, fandom credentials, links to usage of x with intention to exclude, on and on and on to the point it feels less like an argument about the inclusivity of x and more like me on trial - as if my exclusion is somehow my fault.
I'll get you links...at some point, lol. I think I have a list saved somewhere :)