[ SECRET POST #2923 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2923 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 065 secrets from Secret Submission Post #418.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I like that you don't have to *join* anything to participate or contribute to fandom. You don't have to be a member of a special group. If you want to participate, just post something and tag accordingly. In that way, BNFs and newbies are on equal footing in the tags. I know I don't look at *who* is posting so much as *what* they're posting.

Also, ignore the "what are you contributing?" responses. As long as you're making people in your fandom happy, you're doing fine?

[(Anonymous)]

You do realize you've just contradicted yourself, don't you?

"I know I don't look at *who* is posting so much as *what* they're posting." is not exactly compatible with "Also, ignore the "what are you contributing?" responses." You yourself are clearly looking at the CONTENT of what someone's contributing.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, duh. Everybody looks at content. The problem lies when you (general) get snappy because somebody doesn't post content you like or consider worthwhile.

OP didn't say what content they created. They just said they felt like they were contributing and it made them feel happy. Then a bunch of anons come in and demand what OP is contributing and questioning the quality of said contributions (which they know nothing about). *That* is what I was telling

OP could be creating the most in-depth meta in the history of meta. Or they they be reposting nothing bu cat memes. Both are content and both have their audiences and if the OP has found their audience, then the OP is doing just fine, IMO.

[(Anonymous)]

LOL, no.

There's a reason most post get the most likes/reblogs when a BNF reblog then and not when they show up in the tags.

[(Anonymous)]

I said they have equal footing *in the tags*. Obviously, somebody with more followers will get a post more exposure then somebody with only a few.

But in the tags, unless somebody is specifically looking for a user (in which case, they would probably be following them), a post from a newbie has just as much chance as getting noticed as one from a BNF.

[(Anonymous)]

No, not really.
If several users post gifs of the same scene, most people will choose (in the tags) the one with more notes, so BNFs still get more exposure.

Plus most stuff gets burried rather fast in the tags, so getting noticed is not as simple.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, both this, and there's the fact that if you just search the tag (rather than track it), you get most popular posts first. Also, while I certainly get notes from just posting to the tags, I always get surges when someone with a lot of followers reblogs one of my posts. So not only are the BNFs more likely to get notes (because more followers), but they also have some ability to dictate what else gets popular.

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt

"I always get surges when someone with a lot of followers reblogs one of my posts."

Same. Not only that, but I often see reblogs/likes from people I know religiously track and follow the tags I've posted in, but only ever reblog/like when my post has apparently been approved by a BNF as being reblog/like-worthy.

[ketita]

Yeah, I hate this the most. That as a content creator, your exposure is dictated by whether or not popular people deign to grant you exposure ('cause let's be fair, the tags are mostly useless).
On LJ everybody was on the same footing - things were archived linearly, and somebody scrolling through a pairing comm saw everything in the pairing comm. The way it worked, ironically sometimes you got more traffic by posting to the smaller more specific comms, because that way all the people interested in your stuff could find you easily.

Yeah I know, you still had cliques and rec lists and whatnot, but you'll always have word of mouth in fandom. But now it's word-of-mouth to even get /seen/ in the first place.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I really hate that the search function doesn't take you to the actual tag. It's the most infuriating thing to me about tumblr. To go into the tag, you have to take an extra step.

[(Anonymous)]

You do see that there's a distinction between participating and contributing to fandom though, don't you? I'm going to guess so because that's the way you phrased it.

If I lurk in a fandom, I'm still participating. Consuming the fic, art, meta, manips, analyses etc. people contribute is still an act of participation.

If I reblog other people's already-created fic, art, meta, manips, analyses etc. then I am still participating, but still not contributing because all of these things still exist whether I reblog them or not. I am not the one who put any of them out there, therefore I have not contributed to them.

Can you make someone else in the fandom happy by doing the latter? Of course you can (look at the followers for tumblrs that literally only reblog fanart)! And sharing the love and enthusiasm is essential. But calling that act 'contribution' is inaccurate.

[(Anonymous)]

OP didn't say what they contributed, so we can't really judge (which is what I'm taking issue with - a lot of judging with no information besides OP likes tumblr and feels they're finally able to contribute).

[(Anonymous)]

OP said they were a lurker; that doesn't imply they were making and/or doing anything. They also said they didn't participate in discussions, so we can safely rule out meta and/or opinion pieces. Not really seeing how it's hard to extrapolate that out into OP's participation being limited to reblogging.

And the very first question asked what they contributed. Either they don't even care about the replies they got and aren't even reading, or they've chosen not to clarify or provide more information that could elaborate on their position. So at least they're staying true to their committment not to participate in discussions.