This song is not for you lovers

[dolorosa_12]

So, I've been thinking about Livejournal etiquette (and online etiquette more broadly). It was brought on by a couple of posts linked in a metafandom roundup, one of which was a sort of users' guide for newbies to journalling sites, and the other of which was about non-journal-based vs journal-based fandom. It made me realise that I have, over the years, developed my own set of very clear rules for (Livejournal-based) online interaction. I should emphasise that they are MY RULES, and not in any way directed at others. They were arrived at by a combination of trial and error, based on my seven years on LJ, and they work for me, but they may not work for you.


The first lot of rules are for my blog specifically, and the second are for interacting on LJ communities.

1. Tone
a) Use language consistently. I write in what could probably be defined as two styles: Conventional, semi-formal review/commentary/opinion style and Shrieking Internet Fangirl™. I hope it's clear when I'm using each style, and why. For the most part, I strive to write slightly more informally than I do as a book-reviewer, and speak in the first-person more than I would do in other written contexts. I don't use txtspk or many internet abbreviations; although I swear a lot in real life, I tend to refrain from swearing in this blog.

b) Use turns of phrase that appear to be accepted/in common usage among the internet circles I frequent/watch. It's especially important to me to use naming conventions for groups who in real-life contexts are often described as 'minorities' that seem to be the accepted usage by such people and their allies online, even if such terms are not standard usage in my dialect of English (Australian English).

2. Style
My actual writing style is quite inconsistent on this blog, ranging from confessional to detached, emotive to impartial. However, I try to maintain consistency with things like lj-cuts, which I use to hide the following:
Potentially triggering or offensive material
Spoilers
Image-heavy posts
Long posts. I didn't used to cut for long posts, and it bothers me slightly to do so, but as I tend to write about a wide range of things, I thought it was only fair, since not all of you are reading my blog for the same reasons.

3. Navigation
a) Consistent use of tags, so that my readers can select what sort of posts they want to read. I became a lot better about this after I sought out friends and communities who shared common fandom interests. When I was only using LJ to follow the lives of real-life friends, this didn't matter so much, but I find it really frustrating to join communities only to find they don't use tags at all. I appreciate not everyone wants to read about my real life, linkspam, political ranting, pop sociology, squeeing (delete where appropriate) and I feel it's only polite to give them the option not to do so.

b) Clear introductory paragraphs to each blog post, for the same reasons I outlined in a).

4. Interaction/Respect for my readers
a) I rarely flock my entries, as I'm not a very private person, nor am I a big enough fish in the fandom ocean to require flocking to avoid flames and trolls, but I respect other people's reasons for doing so and refrain from commenting on flocked entries, flock my own entries if people ask me to do so etc.

b) Give credit when it's due. I credit all icons, images, links and quotes when known. (There are several user icons that I use whose makers I don't know. If anyone knows, please tell me so I can give appropriate credit.) When I take icons, I comment on the icon post and let the maker know that I'm using them. If someone asks me to remove a link/image/icon etc I do so.

c) Consistent use of names. I'm pretty comfortable about using my real name online. Most of my online friends know it and use it. (That being said, I have very clear preferences about how I should be referred to: Ronni or Dolorosa, essentially, or dolorosa_12 if you're referring to me directly on LJ. I detest being referred to as Dolorosa_12, but it strikes me as a bit special snowflakish to be really strict about.) However, I don't use anyone else's real name unless they've given me permission to do so or use their own real name online in a variety of contexts. In all other cases, I use people's usernames, or, when referring to real-life friends who aren't online, initials.

d) I notify people when I'm adding them as friends, and tell them why. This wasn't as much of a problem initially, because for about five years my friends on LJ were real-life friends and online friends I'd met through the 'Pub or Obernet, and it was clear how I knew them. However, in recent times I've added a lot of people because we share fandoms on LJ, or I like their fanfic or writing. I either tell them in comments to a post that I'm adding them, or I send them a PM. It absolutely infuriates me when people add me and don't explain why. I can sometimes work it out by looking at the comms we have in common, but I never add such people back.

e) MOST IMPORTANTLY I respond to all comments. Or, let me qualify that: I respond to all comments at least once, unless they're statements that require no further comment. In fact, I'm so obsessive about this that once I've written a post, I tend to hang around on LJ for at least another hour in case people comment, and if for whatever reason I'm not going to be able to respond straight away, I let people know. It's almost unheard of for a comment to go 24 hours on my blog without me responding. This strikes me as common courtesy, and is in fact what inspired this rant/essay.

I was answering a question in a metafandom-linked post about the differences between journalling site-based fandom and other online fan communities (forums, mailing lists etc). I wrote a really detailed response basically saying that I like both types of fan community, but that as a non-fic-writer, non-artist, non-vidder who's in fandom for the meta and discussion, I found forums more welcoming and less hierarchical, and easier to make friends in. I like LJ, and I have met some great people through it, but I don't know any of them as well as my forum friends, and I've always suspected that it is because LJ creates a fandom hierarchy with creators of fanworks above consumers, whereas on forums everyone operates on a potentially equal footing. The blogger's lack of response to my comment pretty much proves my point.

[These rules are for comms, not my own blog.]
5. Know the rules
Read the rules and follow them. This isn't that difficult. Most comms have rules on their userinfo, and if I'm unsure, I check them again before posting. It's not that difficult to PM a mod if anything is unclear.

6. Lurk
Familiarise myself with the unwritten rules of each comm. Believe me, this is where a lot of newbies stumble. I always read at least 100 or so posts when I join a new comm, as every online community has its little quirks, depending on the personalities of the people who use it. In particular, I read the comments to posts, as they often make it very clear when a poster or commenter has broken one of these unwritten rules. If I'm particularly anxious, I'll search Fandom Wank or a snark community for posts about said fandom, just to know if there are any things that cause drama or wank within that particular fandom, so as to steer clear of those topics!

7. Variety is the spice of life
Be very clear what I want out of each fandom and the places where I can get each of those things. For example, with some fandoms I want discussion, some I want icons, some I want fic, some I want clear, up to date news (especially within Whedon fandom) amd in some I want crack and craziness. A quick Google or search through LJ's search function is usually enough to find a comm to suit each type of fannish interaction, unless it's a very small fandom, in which case I have to take what I can get (pagansfandom, I'm looking at you in all your awesomosity).

8. Have fun, and be unashamed
Ultimately, I'm online because it's one of my favourite pastimes. I'm online because I want to talk to like-minded people about things we love. If I'm not getting that out of a particular fandom, it's time to leave. That doesn't mean leaving all the other fans behind; if our friendship transcends fandom, then it will continue even if I've lost interest in said fandom. I'm unashamed of the things I like, and I talk about them, and I don't see any point in hiding my enjoyment of various books/films/tv series/bands/singers. Life's too short!

I've changed a couple of my icons. It's the first time I've really struggled with my Basic account's six-icon limit. I stuck with Basic a few years ago because I don't like looking at ads, and I didn't have any control over the kinds of ads my journal would've shown, and I've never regretted the decision much until now. Six icons is enough to convey my five main moods: Happy/enthusiastic, Busy, Sad, Angry, Surprised, with one left over for a generic default icon. However, fifteen icons would be even better! But what I really struggle with is the limit on posts. It's about 400, and I write so much that I've gone over it years ago, which means LJ keeps deleting my oldest entries. That makes me somewhat unhappy. But not enough to upgrade.

One interesting link from Penny Red about political apathy and Gen Y. (I disagree with her labelling us the 'lost generation Mark 2', though. Please! We're Generation Meh or the Whatever Generation!) It ties in nicely with what I was saying about Regurgitator and my generation. I agree that both posts make generalisations, but they're generalisations with some truth.

EDIT Hello metafandom people! It's great to see you here. Just a quick heads up about a couple of things:

I've never been metafandomed before (although I follow it and read a lot of the posts that get linked to in metafandom), so I apologise if I make any newbie mistakes when it comes to discussing meta with a whole group of meta-enthusiasts.

Also, I'm going to be awake for about another 45 minutes (until midnight UK time), so I'll be responding to comments for that time. After that, if I don't respond, it's not because I'm ignoring you, just that I'm asleep, and I will reply as soon as I can tomorrow.

Anyway, I'm really enjoying talking to you all!

Comments

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

This is a great guide to behaving decently online. I particularly agree with you about telling people why you're friending them and replying to comments. Although it doesn't bother me when people add me out of the blue, I always make sure I leave a comment when I'm friending someone. If they don't friend me back or if they ignore the comment entirely, then I'll probably unfriend them. To me, LJ's about meeting new people and making new friends, not just reading blogs.

I'm just as obsessed about responding to comments as you are. It's politeness, pure and simple. Someone has taken the time to read what I've had to say and to respond to it - it would be rude not to respond to that. Plus, I like engaging with what others say and potentially starting interesting conversations based on my post.

I seem to judge people on whether they respond to comments, too. If someone consistently seems to ignore me, then I become less and less interested in replying to their comments, or even reading their posts. I guess I just behave the way I would in real life. I don't want to treat people differently just because they're not sitting right in front of me.

I love your rule to "be unashamed". That's one of the awesome things about the internet - you can squee about things and no-one will look at you strangely!

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I'm glad you agree! The comments thing really bugs me. If you don't want comments, you should disable comments or write locked posts, but in my opinion, Livejournal (and LJ clones) are perfectly set up for this kind of communicative, almost collaborative blogging, what with the friends list function and so on.

I love your rule to "be unashamed". That's one of the awesome things about the internet - you can squee about things and no-one will look at you strangely!

Oh, they still look at you strangely. But they are more aware that they have equally embarrassing/silly interests, and so everyone is more tolerant of one another's obsessions.

[cesy.livejournal.com]

See, I disagree with both of these. They're both true when you're using LJ for chatting to friends, but not true when you're using LJ for following a blog. Would you expect a newspaper columnist to reply personally to every single Letter to the Editor? Wouldn't they get fed up if every single person who bought a subscription to their magazine also sent them a note saying why?

It's two different ways of using LJ, and the appropriate behaviour in each case is different. I like that DW has the subscribe/give access split to make this clearer - you can subscribe to someone without needing to ask permission or let them know, but if you're going to give them access or want access to their journal, then it's polite to leave a comment.

[katiefoolery.livejournal.com]

It's definitely all down to the way you use LJ, that's for sure. I've always been drawn to it because of the social, interactive nature of its users, which means I've never really viewed my friends page as an RSS feed. LJ's more like a dinner party to me: if someone sounds interesting, then I'll introduce myself and hope to get to know them better. I don't really want to feel as though I'm sitting down to read someone's column; I'd much prefer to feel as though I'm reading someone's letter to me... and whoever else is on their friends list.

Different rules for different reasons, providing we're all treating people with respect.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Yes, I think you make a very valid point. It depends entirely on what exactly you're using LJ for, and what exactly you want out of it. As I say above, it comes down entirely to personal preference: what you view yourself as doing when you blog, and how you perceive your blog. I perceive my blog as a conversation between friends - thus, I continue the conversation when people reply. If you view your blog as something more akin to a newspaper article, then of course a different attitude when responding to comments would be appropriate.

[melaniedavidson.livejournal.com]

But what I really struggle with is the limit on posts. It's about 400, and I write so much that I've gone over it years ago, which means LJ keeps deleting my oldest entries.

Really? I didn't know about this and find it more than a little alarming... I can't find anything about it in any faqs, either. How did you find out about it?

[yvi (from livejournal.com)]

As much as I dislike LJ; it doesn't do it. You can only access the last 200 via the main journal page, but all journal entries are still there and accessible through, for example, the calendar: http://dolorosa-12.livejournal.com/calendar

[melaniedavidson.livejournal.com]

That's what I'd thought... and clicking around a little I see people with basic accounts and way more than 400 entries. So... this confuses me.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Oh, really? I'm so happy to know this, as I'd thought my earlier entries had simply been deleted as I filled up my journal. Thank you so much for letting me know!

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

As you'll see from my comment below to yvi, I think I must've misinterpreted what was happening to my journal. The posts disappeared from the main blog itself, but are still accessible from the calendar.

Sorry to inadvertently freak you out!

[melaniedavidson.livejournal.com]

Ahhhh. When you said you reached the limit years ago, and there really are only about 400 visible entries on your journal (it says 405 on your profile, and if you do ?skip=400 the earliest visible one is the same as the earliest one you can see on the calendar), well.... :P

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

No, LJ is deleting stuff. I just went back and had a look through the calendar at the earliest entries, and there certainly was stuff that I wrote before the first entry you can see for late 2005. So I have no idea what's happened to it. I knew I'd written more than 405 entries!

[yvi (from livejournal.com)]

On this journal? Your profile says your account was created in December 2005.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Yeah, after I replied to waywardoctagon I thought I might've made a mistake. I'm almost certain I've been around on LJ since 2004, and this was my first account, so it confuses me that my profile would say that. I certainly have a memory of writing one of those 'so, I don't really know what this blogging deal is all about' kind of posts, and I'm not the sort of person to leap into a journal without some kind of introductory post, so I'm extremely confused now.

I can check against one of my friends' journals. She posted when I joined saying something like, 'Ronni's journal is dolorosa_12, so if it's before December 2005 that will clear this up once and for all.

It's either a case of me misremembering things to an alarmingly stupid extent, or LJ doing things that are alarmingly intrusive. I'd kind of prefer it to be the former, even if it makes me look like a forgetful bubblehead...

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

No, I was wrong. Her post is from December 12, the same day that my first post appears. I could've sworn I'd been on LJ earlier than that, but it appears I'm mistaken.

Now I'm really worried about my memory!

[nic]

(Here via MF, hi!)

I found this quite interesting. Most of it's quite similar to what I do, but there are two things that stand out as different:

It absolutely infuriates me when people add me and don't explain why.

I do that all the time. Generally it's someone I've been interacting with on a community (and when I checked out their journal, I liked it), OR I've read a lot of their fic and want to keep them on my friendslist so I can see their latest stories. When I add someone, it's not assuming that I am going to be their "friend", it's because I want to read their posts on my flist. I don't care if they add me back or not!

once I've written a post, I tend to hang around on LJ for at least another hour in case people comment

Wow. That's...dedication. I will go weeks without replying to comments, because if I want to have a discussion on something, I need to be in the right frame of mind for it.

I quite often post something and I'm generally writing for myself (in my own journal). If people reply, that's cool, that's their choice. But I never see myself as obligated to reply to what they wrote. I mean, once it's an obligation, the fun of it's gone.

Of course, this is just me, and I'm in a 'sharing my opposite POV' mood. :)

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I think I might not have explained myself particularly clearly here.

Generally it's someone I've been interacting with on a community (and when I checked out their journal, I liked it), OR I've read a lot of their fic and want to keep them on my friendslist so I can see their latest stories. When I add someone, it's not assuming that I am going to be their "friend", it's because I want to read their posts on my flist. I don't care if they add me back or not!

If I'd been interacting with someone on a community, it wouldn't be completely out of the blue and unexpected for me to add him/her (however, I'd probably still do something along the lines of mentioning in one of my comments that I was planning on adding him/her). With the fic example you mention, I have done that myself several times (and add the fic writers for the same reason as you - to keep track of their latest stories), but I always send them a PM saying something like 'Hi! I have really been enjoying your ~insert fandom here~ stories and can't wait to read more of your writing. For this reason I've friended you. Please don't feel like you have to reciprocate, I just wanted you to be aware of how I came across your journal'.

I suspect that my reasons for doing this are based entirely on my own LJ experiences. I don't create fanworks or participate actively in LJ-based fandom. Most of my readers are real-life friends or friends I met through other online fan communities (forums), ie I knew them before I started blogging. I don't tend to interact with people much in LJ-based fandoms (beyond the occasional comment on people's fic or 'I like this icon, I will credit when I use it') so I find it somewhat disturbing when people add me out of the blue, as I can't understand what made them notice me.

Does that make any kind of sense?

As for you point on having to be in the right frame of mind for discussing something, when I post about something, that means I am in the right frame of mind.

[nic]

I suspect that my reasons for doing this are based entirely on my own LJ experiences. I don't create fanworks or participate actively in LJ-based fandom. Most of my readers are real-life friends or friends I met through other online fan communities (forums), ie I knew them before I started blogging.

This is probably the key to our different approaches. I use LJ as a way to "find" people whereas you use it to connect with people you already know (or want to get to know better).

Thanks again for the interesting discussion. :)

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

And you're welcome. :)

[ninasis.livejournal.com]

I do that all the time. Generally it's someone I've been interacting with on a community (and when I checked out their journal, I liked it), OR I've read a lot of their fic and want to keep them on my friendslist so I can see their latest stories. When I add someone, it's not assuming that I am going to be their "friend", it's because I want to read their posts on my flist.

I used to be like that too and then I started abusing the tracking feature instead. Now I mostly just track people for fic if they don't talk about anything I'm interested in outside of fic posts.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

That's an interesting way of doing things. I never thought about that before. (That being said, I only follow about three fic writers and the rest I keep track of through fic communities and recs from friends, so it's not a huge issue for me. The 'randoms' I tend to add are people who are among the handful of LJers who share some of my more obscure fandom interests, mostly books that no one else has heard of.)

[a_blackpanther]

Found my way here via metafandom.

e) MOST IMPORTANTLY I respond to all comments...

That is great rule, and it's something i try to stick to as well. Not to mention that it is annoying when you post in a discussion post but no one, not even the OP, replies back. Even if your comment wasn't the most original a well thought out comment deserves a reply.

Otherwise these are some great "suggestion" rules. LJ and other such social interaction site should have a newbie guide that begins with this and then on to the technobabble of how to use your journal.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I'm glad you agree with me on the comments thing. I'm of the opinion that if someone writes something that you feel is worth responding to, the OP ought to acknowledge your response, even if it's just a 'thanks for commenting'. If you're not in the mood to write well-thought-out replies, mention this in your post or comments.

LJ and other such social interaction site should have a newbie guide that begins with this and then on to the technobabble of how to use your journal.

I couldn't agree more! The problem is that while the things I've outlined above probably seem like common sense, they're not that obvious to everyone. I arrived at a lot of my LJ rules after a lot of observation of how people interacted on LJ comms and similar sites, and if I had been a less anxious, cautious kind of person I probably would've leapt into things and inadvertently broken a lot of unwritten LJ rules. The problem is that the rules vary from community to community and site to site, as they reflect the personalities of the people who hang out in each community and site, and so what is applicable somewhere might be anathema elsewhere.

[a_blackpanther]

As a mod on a community i can see how some of these things really aren't as common sense as one would think, especially to people who are new to general fandom & lj. I've tried not to make too many rules for the comm, but i've still ended up with quite a few, most of which could be classified under "guidelines for posting".

The problem is that the rules vary from community to community and site to site, as they reflect the personalities of the people who hang out in each community and site, and so what is applicable somewhere might be anathema elsewhere.

That too is valid. Unfortunately those can only be learned by trial and error or just lurking for a while. But when you find a new fandom/community thats hares your interests you might be very excited to get into the fray of things.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I'm not talking so much about posting guidelines as these can be explained quite easily. I'm talking more about odd little quirks that are fandom-specific (or even sub-section-of-fandom-specific). For example, some fandoms are more crazy when it comes to shipping than others (I've just got into Avatar: The Last Airbender and noticed that every shipping fic seems to be prefaced with warnings like 'No bashing, if you don't ship this, don't read it', whereas in Being Human fandom everyone has always seemed much more laid back) and you learn by lurking not to talk about shipping unless you want a big fight.

But when you find a new fandom/community thats hares your interests you might be very excited to get into the fray of things.
There are two fandoms in which I'm a very active participant. However, they are forum-based, not LJ-based. I've got very close friends on these forums. We've all met in real life, we spend hours talking to one another on IRC etc. The problem with LJ-based fandom is that it's so focused on fanworks, and even the meta tends to be meta about the production of fanworks. I have nothing against fanworks, but I can't create them myself (or at least I don't have the time to teach myself how to write fic/make art/etc to a standard that I'd consider acceptable to share with others), which puts me at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to LJ-based fandom.

I don't mean for this to be coming across as a whine about the nature of LJ-based fandom. It is what it is, and I'm here, so I must be getting something out of it. (I'm actually really enjoying discussing this with metafandom people!)

[zvi-likes-tv.livejournal.com]

I take it you've never been slashdotted/fandomwanked/metafandomed/etc.

[a_blackpanther]

No, i haven't. Or maybe i have, but i haven't checked and no one's mentioned it yet.

Then again, when i stumbled onto lj i already had a bit of fandom experience (in both wank and wonderful), so (i hope) i've avoided seriously stepping on anyone's toes.

[zvi-likes-tv.livejournal.com]

You honestly don't have to say something painful or offensive to have a hundred people comment on your journal in the space of two or three days. Insightful or amusing can do the trick just as well. I've had the volume of comments on a post go quite past my ability to respond to all of them several times, and I've also commented on other people's posts where they had too many comments to respond. I disagree completely that the fact that someone commented creates a social obligation to respond.

(I also recognize that "too many" has to do with individual temperament, the subject matter at hand, and everything else going on in one's life, up to and including how well your timezone meshes with Americans.)

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

No, you're absolutely right, as this post is just demonstrating! (Although I've had this many comments before just from people on my flist on several occasions, but in those cases it's been basically one or two friends carrying out a discussion with me, rather than a whole bunch of different people commenting.)

I disagree completely that the fact that someone commented creates a social obligation to respond.

This is why I put the disclaimer at the beginning of this post that these 'rules' were only things that I'd decided worked for me. As you say above, I've never been linked to by one of the big sites before - and I have seen that some posts linked to on metafandom and so on get comments in the hundreds, which would obviously be quite time consuming to respond to.

However, that being said, I view my blogging as something like a conversation, so when people reply, just as if they were talking to me in real life, I would feel rude not acknowledging that they were speaking. If - as was the case last night when I had to go to sleep - the conversation starts becoming too time-consuming, I can let people know that I won't be replying for a little while.

Once again, I should reiterate that these guidelines work for me, but, for the reasons you and others have mentioned, they may not work for everyone, and I was not intending them to be some kind of Guide To Being a Good Journal Site Citizen...

[grammalogue.livejournal.com]

(Here via metafandom.)

I think that’s the allure of the Internet, to most people. If you* don’t want to reply to someone, you can block them. If you don’t know how to express yourself right away, you have the time to think of a response. Obviously, you can ignore or put people off in real life, but it’s much more difficult. Journals, forums, etc. are so great, because not everyone has the same schedule, or is in the same time zone, and it gives those people an opportunity to have discussions when they‘re not quite as busy. If you want quick replies online, you can use an instant messaging service.

* General usage of the word "you."

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Oh, absolutely. But I wasn't meaning reply in the sense of replying instantaneously (although for me personally, when I write about something, that's when I'm in the mood to discuss it, or I wouldn't have written about it, so it's often more of a struggle for me to articulate my thoughts clearly after some time has passed, since my mind is no longer really focused on whatever I wrote about). Obviously the time between writing and replying varies from person to person, and a lot of commenters here have mentioned that they like to mull over their thoughts for a while before replying to comments.

I meant reply in the sense of 'reply at all', 'reply within what I consider a reasonable amount of time'. Now, for me, a reasonable amount of time is 24 hours, since I have friends in a whole range of timezones and I can't stay awake all night waiting to respond to my friends in Australia (for example). However, as I point out in this post, these 'rules' are rules that work for me, and I certainly didn't write them with any prescription in mind. If you have a different 'reasonable amount of time' to me, that's totally fine.

(Again, I use 'you' to mean 'people in general'.)

from metafandom

[tree]

I found forums more welcoming and less hierarchical, and easier to make friends in.

interesting, as my experience of forums is the complete opposite. i find forums to be stultifying and self-reinforcing. insular, at the very least, and unwelcoming of new ideas. apparently our forums live at opposite ends of the universe. ;)

Re: from metafandom

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I imagine it depends on the forum. I think if they're for a big, behemoth-like fandom (I wouldn't dream of trying to get into Harry Potter forums), it's very difficult to break in as a new fan. But if they're for something relatively niche (mine are for His Dark Materials and a series of Australian fantasy novels, Obernewtyn), people tend to be more welcoming.

Again, though, there is the matter of unwritten rules. When I joined both of these forums, I lurked for weeks, reading through the threads and observing how people interacted, taking note in particular of the sorts of things that caused arguments and tension.

I find the same problem with insularity within journalling-based fandom! So I guess it's a matter of personal experience. I guess in all corners of the internet, finding acceptance takes a lot of effort and work...

[hungrytiger11.livejournal.com]

Hello! I'm here via the meta fandom comm.

This was a really interesting post. A lot of it has things I do (or strive to do, my tags are a mess due to little things like having both plural and singular versions of words...), but some of it was very helpful and not things I'd have thought of. The one that sticks out is the pming why one is friending another. I always check out what people's friending policies are and try to follow those, meaning if you have to ask to be added I'll usually explain why. However, I've gotten those random people who friend me, and in retrospect think that'd be really nice to know why someone was friending me. I'm gonna take up that rule!

Anyway, overall, very nice meta on fandom and nettiequitte.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Thanks for your comment!

My remark about friending people seems to be getting quite a response. Friending policies are quite useful, aren't they? I suspect a lot of my own problems with this might be fixed if I had a friending policy of my own, although I've never seen the need because 90% of my content is public. It's more for my own interest, as I find it confusing when people add me randomly.

[starbrow.livejournal.com]

You've stated that you feel replying to all comments is a big part of showing respect for your readers. Unfortunately, not everyone can do that, or even feels the need to.

For instance, I have depression, and therefore social interaction can be very difficult for me at times. If I make the effort to post in my journal, it's probably been quite difficult to do that. Forcing myself to respond to every comment would simply mean that I just wouldn't ever post again - it would be too much for me. But there are people on LJ who I care about deeply and have known for many many years - I don't want to just disappear, or make them feel like they weren't welcome to talk to me, as I feel disabling comments would do.

So I feel the best solution is to not put myself under pressure to answer every comment. I will answer some, when I can, and if someone asks a question, I will do my best to reply. But I really don't feel that means I don't have respect for my readers, when many of them are my dear friends who I care about - and who I hope know that I care about them, without having to prove it by answering every comment they make.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

That's a very good point, and it's something that I hadn't considered at all.

I don't view answering people's questions as 'proving' anything, since that would mean that I was in some way inconveniencing myself or forcing myself to do something that I found unpleasant or difficult in order to demonstrate my respect or care for my friends and commenters. I enjoy commenting, and if I didn't, I would disable comments or post to an entirely locked journal.

But I do understand what you're saying and I apologise for not taking this into account in my guidelines.

[ssquirrel-fic.livejournal.com]

Here via fandomnews ~

I agree with most of these, especially the tagging. I mostly use LJ for fandom, so it can be a nightmare trying to find things if people don't tag consistently. (Although it's not as bad since the introduction of the LJ search thing.)

The comments issue seems to be quite controversial. Whilst I don't think everyone needs to reply to me at all, I *personally* feel seriously impolite if I don't reply to comments. Particularly on fanfiction. I think it probably depends on how popular you are though - I've never had too many comments to reply to, so it isn't a problem!

Also ~ I use people's usernames, or, when referring to real-life friends who aren't online, initials. I'm glad it's not just me who does that. Although it seems like almost everyone I know have names beginning with the same letter. =]

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

I think people who participate in fandom tend to be a bit better about tagging (although you still get the odd comm that doesn't use tags, which can be a bit difficult to navigate).

Yeah, the comments thing. A lot of people seem to have taken this post as being somehow prescriptive, which it's not. I did write it in response to something that happened to me, but it really, really, really is what it says on the tin - my own internet rules, no one else's.

However, having this linked by metafandom and fandomnews has been useful, in that a lot of people came and explained to me their own reasons for not replying to comments (or not replying to comments immediately), which made me realise that perhaps I was a bit guilty of taking my own experiences and claiming them as universal.

[azurelunatic]

(also here via metafandom)

Your statement "This strikes me as common courtesy, and is in fact what inspired this rant/essay" sounded a lot like it had an undertone of 'When I comment to someone and do not get a reply within a time that I might consider reasonable, I feel I have been treated discourteously, and may take offense, and have in fact been inspired to rant.'

And that is really very much less 'These are purely the rules I use but no-one else is obliged to follow them' and more 'These are the rules I use, which are also the rules that I assume you are using too unless I get notified otherwise, and if you break the rules I think you're using, I'll be surprised and hurt and maybe angry'. Neither of those are 'These are the rules you *should* use', which is unambiguously prescriptivist, but the latter can imply that if someone violates a rule and doesn't have an ironclad reason for doing so, then there will be social fallout. Social fallout is just as unfriendly as a 'hi, you broke this rule', and a lot harder to pin down.

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've realised that this is the case. While I didn't write this with the intention to rant about other people's behaviour, I chose my words very poorly and gave the impression that I was doing so. I believe that my intentions are irrelevant and that the way people have interpreted my post is the important thing here. For this reason, I'm sorry. I never meant to sound like I was criticising anyone, but I did, and that was wrong.

This post is also an example of me taking my own experiences and (subconsciously) acting as if they are universal. My own circumstances and personality make it very easy for me to reply promptly to comments: I'm a postgraduate student with very few commitments on my time, I spend most of my day writing at my computer, most of my commenters are personal friends (although about half of them live on the opposite side of the world as I am an Australian living in England), when I post about something it means I'm in the mood for discussing it, and (until now) I've never been linked to by any links roundup sites, which means I don't tend to get big floods of comments. Of course what I never considered was that not everyone has the luxury or inclination to have my kind of life or personality and there are a whole range of reasons why people might not want or be able to have my kind of comments policy.

Woah, that's a bit wall-of-texty, but basically what I'm trying to say is that I said something, and it wasn't right, and I'm sorry.

[allegraconbrio.livejournal.com]

Do not feel a need to respond to this comment. I've just been reading back on metafandom after being away for 6+ months and well, I stumbled into your journal and I just wanted to say that you handled your goof quite well. I imagine that after reading your responses to the comments I have read that you are re-thinking some of your rules and that is good. I also imagine that it must be horribly cringe-inducing to find out that a post that anyone has made and didn't intend many people to read, ended up receiving lots of readers and while those readers do not have the same history as the poster. That old assumption thing.

I think you handled yourself very gracefully. Your internet rules are not mine, but I kind of like the way you roll. :)

edited to try to make this more readable, oops

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Thank you for saying so.

The hilarious thing is that I've been following metafandom for ages and wished so badly for one of my posts (preferably my review/essay posts on Wordpress) to be featured, and then when one of my posts DID get posted it was a bit of a 'be careful what you wish for' situation!

My rules still work for me, but I'm certainly being much more careful about taking my own experiences and claiming them as universal (which is actually something I've been called out for in the past).

[februaryfour]

I used to respond to every last comment on my LJ, simply because I could (got into the habit of this on my fandom LJ, to thank people for fic comments). Now I'm beginning to wonder if I should stop. I don't have enough time to.

ETA: Oh, sorry, didn't specify: here via azurelunatic (but I think I came over from DW).

[dolorosa-12.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've been realising that the difference between people like me who respond to every comment and people who don't is very strongly related to time and the volume of comments (and the relationship between these two things. I have a journal where most of the commenters are friends and I don't get a lot of traffic (four or five comments is probably the norm for me), so obviously I have plenty of time to reply. If you're getting metafandom-level numbers of comments, mainly from strangers or people you don't know well, it's a whole different story, something that I didn't really consider when making this post.