I do solemnly swear to be less flamethrower-happy and more constructive-criticism-happy with any PPC piece or related fanwork I shall do in the future. I will try to help, and not hurt, and strive to be funny even for the authors of the fanfics I parody.

Thank you for the soapbox!

I wonder if this large elaborate post citing the definitions on a cursory google search will do anything to clarify to there people.

http://community.livejournal.com/the_ppc/52871.html?thread=244871#t244871

At this point, my guess is 'no,' and I'm understanding why Sedri was so hesitant to spend any time talking to these people.

But my personal feelings regarding her haven't changed significantly, especially after her response. I still wish to talk about them, but I can always do that in my LJ.

PS: I posted on the Anti-Sporking Essay Thread before I read this one. If I said anything there that may not agree with what you said, i'm sorry.

I replied to impertinence with what I felt was a small summary of our Misogyny discussion.

But I did end up reading it, and it made me rethink how I write my own characters. Up to now, I've been kind of paranoid about making Mary Sues by accident, stressing over whether there's too much angst, or whether having child abuse in the past is a good idea or not, or whether this explanation is good enough for that certain trait or event. But I guess, reading this, I realize that the important thing is for the character to have meaningful strengths and equally meaningful weaknesses, and for each character to react to certain situations realistically and according to said strengths and weaknesses.

Am I hitting close to the nail here?

In response to your post, Neshomeh, I've been thinking of doing something interesting with my agents; namely, having them tackle one of my own badfics. I dunno, maybe it'll give me better perspective on how to write missions without being unintentionally and needlessly insulting.

Must get you a comfier soapbox if you're going to use it this well. I applaud you.

You think two pages is long, try slogging through fifteen! And I wrote them!

Mature, thoughtful, not a spur-of-the-moment response (or at least, it doesn't look like one) and it's in no way a rant. Has anyone put a link to this on Boosette's essay yet?

First of all, that was a great post you just made. It was gently nudging us in the right direction, I feel. I do have a slightly different opinion on concrit, though.

Is it a nice thing to do? Sure. Is it good if the PPC does it? Of course. Should it be mandatory--should we feel like we have to? Absolutely not.

PotCSues put it very well when she said:

I never review the people I report, mostly because in order to give constructive criticism, I have to feel as though the story in question has some merit and that the author will be receptive to my critique. As such, I don't want to waste my time honestly critiquing a story for someone who will not benefit from it and/or who did not put any effort into their story in the first place.

In other words, constructive criticism won't work if:

a) there's no solid foundation (canon knowledge and/or language knowledge) to construct something on. If the best we can say is, "You might want to read the books you say you're a fan or," or "Please find a third-grader to teach you why end punctuation is a good idea," then there's really no point in giving concrit. We can be betas, but we can't be Remedial Writing 101; there's only so much we can do.

b) the author doesn't actually care about the fanfic s/he is writing. More than once, I've caught blatant admissions that the Suethors wrote a fic down while on the phone, in class, or watching TV. If that's the case, we'll have put more effort into our critique than they'll have put into writing the fic in the first place. To mock such a fic will give us entertainment; critiquing it seems like a waste of our time.

c) the author is not receptive to criticism. This is often the case in Suefic. It’s one of the many problems with creating a Mary Sue: since the Suethor identifies with the character so strongly, s/he tends to treat even slightly negative comments about said character as a terrible personal insult.

I would argue that at least one of those holds true for a majority of the badfic we come across. That being the case, I will give concrit when I believe it will actually do some good, but I won't feel as if I am obligated to do so before every sporking or every mission.

~Araeph

It's clear, well thought out, and in no way 'propagandized.' Good work.

I agree. I'm not interested in the author backlash. One of my pet peeves is intimidating the weak. What is important is just having fun, and I know that if I get criticised, I'd feel bad too, but it's important to take it in your stride and try harder next time. There are a couple of things I can't just say yes to, but they're minor points and I'd shoot myself in the foot trying to explain them anyway.

So yeah. It's not bullying or misogyny. just having a lark at bad writing.

Most certainly, this is an important part of the natural cycle of things. Deviation~correction~deviation~correction. That pattern is the way our world operates, and those that do not correct deviate away from what they originally were.

Of course, after Neshomeh spells it out so clearly it seems simple, but these things find a way of slipping in.

That is why giving the PPC a constitution is the wisest thing the Founders could have possibly done. It sets the standard and we need to remember to follow it, or the PPC will find itself astray from its course.

"With great power comes great responsibility."

Believe it or not, the PPC does have a measure of power, especially when compared to the influence of one person. Its you who gets to decide how that power is used, so choose wisely.