I had help writing this response. I was too upset.
Regarding your response declining my request for permisson to write for the PPC, you will of course understand my disappointment. That said, however, I have some concerns about your interpretation of some of my in your response, particularly with the thread-from May of last year that addressed LGBT issues.
While I am not noticeably subtle in many of remarks therein, I think they were frequently interpreted by other respondents in a manner not intended by me, and in language at least as vociferous as mine, which impugned the veracity and source of my arguments, even while they – too often – went on to make counter-arguments with assertions that are in error as a matter of historical record. Note that in this regard I do not attribute this to malign intent on their part, just not doing sufficient homework before responding, a common problem in modern discourse.
All in all, I feel like I have labeled the “bad girl”, even while my similarly intense critics have gotten off scot-free.
My question at this point is whether your concern with my remarks is chiefly with the form (i.e., they are not likely to be confused with diplomacy) or with the content (i.e., they are not politically correct). A number of respondents in the thread in question seemed to talk a good game regarding giving my reasons for my position, but when I responded that they derive from my religious convictions, I received a deluge of opprobrium. The typical response indicated that “you can't force your religious beliefs on others”. Well, if they mean I can't create a theocracy, and force them to believe in the divinity of Jesus, as a matter of law, they are of course correct – that is what the Constitution is for.
On the other hand, if my religious beliefs inform me that, e.g., “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not steal” are universal truths binding on all people, then I retain the right of free speech to advance those positions, those values, even unto law, – that is also what the Constitution is for – regardless of whether it is part of Catholic teaching, Hindu teaching or Epicurean teaching, because the issue is not “where does this idea come from”, but rather “is it true”. Determining whether it is true is destined to be a matter of much political discussion, of course, but the fundamental idea that those informed by religious convictions have just as much right in the public square to advance their ideas is squarely supported in the Constitution, and the those who hold that they do not are anti-intellectual at best, and anti-religious at worst.
The following addresses your concerns point by point. If you still disagree, please respond by citing the actual text of mine that you are referencing so I can be sure exactly what words you are addressing.
“Your behavior outside of the PPC community and in it has shown that you do not have the best intent in your heart, or the spirit of the PPC in mind.
“About a year ago, in a thread about LGBT, you publicly condemned several people for being who they are, and for not believing the same things as you.”
No. I didn’t. I didn’t condemn anyone. What I did was attempt to defend my position against an onslaught of “you’re wrong, you’re stupid, you’re an idiot, the Bible sux.” I notice you don’t mention all the insults I received then. I was condemned. It is not my job as a Christian to be lukewarm about sin.
“When someone confronted you in private over it, you proceeded to mock them for differences in religious belief and opinion on others after the fact in your LiveJournal.
“This was brought to the awareness of another PPCer, who spoke to you about it.”
I’m sorry, I have no idea what you’re talking about.
“You didn't delete those entries. You just hid them from public view.”
Of course I didn’t delete the exchanges. I don’t delete anything. Old fics I’ve never finished, old versions of fics that I’ve edited, edited character profiles on the LJ, all the papers I got in school for the last eight years....I still have them all. I’m a pack rat. I keep everything. Why is this a problem?
“You show off proudly several 'exchanges' where you harass and mock people for writing things they like.”
I never said I was proud. I suppose you feel the same way about fandom_wank, which does the same thing. This is really not fair. The PPC also mocks people who write things they like, but I get attacked for posting conversations with people who drove me nuts? Even when most of them were privatized last October?
“Your friend, Antaprate took your side and defended you and accused them of flaming you.”
Once. Maybe twice. In February of 2011. Why does this have bearing?
“Antaprate has her own fanfiction.net account where she proudly declares she holds grudges against people,”
I am not going to deny that I am Antaprate. It was the name of a spell I created, and I needed an extra account to post my My Immortal project. The “grudges” part came after certain people (not PPCers) decided that, despite repeated attempts to explain to them, they had the ability to inform me why I wrote things. Which was patently false, and really got on my nerves. The only reason I ever denied being A was for the benefit of one single FF user, and I’m pretty sure she figured it out so it’s a moot point. The only time I ever actively socked with Anta was, as before mentioned, in February 2011.
“and that if people wanted to find her Kat "the fanfic slayer" stories, they could PM her for them.”
Yes. I deleted them from FF.net after the above-mentioned people made me angry. I save everything, so I posted them somewhere else. They’ve been gone for a few months now. Why is this bad?
“This goes somewhat against her being an agent, doesn't it? There's nothing in your Dreamwidth there, or on your Tripod site saying you don't own that person or her character.”
I suppose the more obvious “Girl names agent after friend’s screen name” din’t occur to you.
“You are also using Antaprate's character Kat,”
No. You’re wrong. Kat the Slayer is not Kat the Agent. They happen to share the same nickname, sex, and hair color. That is all. A name does not a character make, as many badfic character replacement writers have yet to learn.
“who was, as previously noted, was used as a Sue Slayer who was sent on a mission from God with all sorts of powers to eliminate characters you decided were Mary Sues.”
Isn’t that exactly what the PPC does? God=Flowers, powers and gadgets=DoSAT gadgets, Mary Sues=Mary Sues. I don’t see why this is a problem.
“Sockpuppeting to try and protect yourself from the people you have belittled and insulted for writing fic you don't agree with goes against the spirit of the community.”
I also have another FF account, which I use to favorite Supernatural fics. Is this also socking? I don’t actively sock. A was originally created as an extra account, not a sock. And don’t we all do this, posting PPC missions on LJ and what not rather than with our FF names? Isn’t the PPC about mocking badfic?
“You have denied that you and Antaprate are the same person elsewhere, but here you are using them as a character.”
I repeat the part about the excuse, and the non-denial.
“The PPC does not abide of bullying people, or of harassing them.”
I don’t bully, any more than the PPC does by writing missions.
“It does not approve of reposting the works of others in very public places to mock them further, which you have done under your alter ego's name, with that intent stated.”
Since when is laughing at intentional trollfics is not allowed? This is news to me.
“It also doesn't approve of pretending to be someone else to continue harassing and bullying people and to defend yourself.”
I didn’t.
“Additionally, you have a multitude of Sues that you are still writing,”
Please explain why my characters are Sues. This was not brought up last time I requested Permission.
“and you wrote and posted a PPC piece without permission that was not a permission piece.”
I fully believed I was allowed to do that, judging from the “non-continuity-affecting” comments on the Permission page. And I quote from my entry: “This is not continuity-affecting whatsoever, so hopefully I'm allowed to post it without Permission. If I'm not, leave a message on my wiki talk page and I'll take it down.” I never got a message, so I left it up.
I am disturbed that in order to prove I am a nasty person, you are citing events that happened from nine to seventeen months ago. Why, if they were a problem, were they not mentioned last time I requested Permission? Why was the supposed Sueness of my OCs not brought up then? You never explain why you think my characters are Sues, either.
Last time it was “Your characters’ backstory doesn’t make sense,” and I fixed that. Why the sudden attack?
I have deliberately not commented on things like that for months. Why am I automatically in the wrong?