Um. Way to be self-sabotaging fandom! Hating people who are actively participating in fandom just because they're participating is not going to help anything. And what's up with the personal vendettas against BNFs? There's this really nifty feature called the scroll button when you don't want to read something.
Anyway, some people defend hate memes because they're like, the only opportunity for non-BNFs to be heard and anonymous commenting levels the playing field or something. Yes, it totally sucks that lj is more of a popularity contest than a cohesive community, but seriously, if you're yourself are actually involved in fandom, can you not see the good in encouraging everyone to participate? Because it seems to me that a lot of times creative people play off of each other and encouraging that should never, ever be a bad thing. One thing I do wish though, is that some of the stuff brought up in the hate threads could actually be discussed outside of the context of petty, spiteful commentary.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I really try to leave feedback for everything I enjoyed reading, but if it's a writer who I know doesn't respond to feedback, I usually won't bother. Above and beyond any considerations of fandom etiquette and politeness, not responding to feedback (at least to me) seems to indicate a certain level of indifference towards even getting feedback at all.
And personally, I like writing feedback, I like picking out what I loved, and telling writers exactly what worked for me. So I usually spend a good amount of time trying to construct something more than a quick "thanks!" (not that there's anything wrong with doing that, sometimes it's all I have time for too.) Fandom is a reciprocal culture, if I don't feel like the time I put into feedback is appreciated, I won't leave it. And more than that, feedback is pretty much the best opportunity for readers to interact with writers, it's how a lot of meta gets discussed, and how a lot of people meet new friends. I don't think every writer has to automatically make friends with all of their reviewers, but I think it's nice when the channels of communication are at least open to that, even if all it is is a standard thank you reply, at least that's something.
Some of the best meta discussions I've had have come out of feedback threads,
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
(stealing
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
- Mood:
curious
Comments
In another discussion that sprung from this thread and that I can't find a link of at the moment, the OP said that s/he doesn't reply to feedbacks unless there is a question or something because s/he doesn't know what to say in response beside the blanket thank you and this s/he feel is an inadequate response.
That is a viewpoint I try to see when I noticed that a particular author doesn't respond to feedbacks, either that they are too modest, that they are unable to think of a response, or that they are overwhelmed by the amount of feedbacks and thus, couldn't reply to all of them, because the alternative? Well, it's not something I want to dwell on long, because it either reflects negatively on me or the author.
If the only interaction I have with someone is through feedback, and it continues to be completely one sided, how am I to know whether they have a reason for not responding to me? I think you are a lot nicer than me for giving them the benefit of the doubt, but I can't help but feel less than encouraged to continue interacting with them.