[ SECRET POST #3047 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3047 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.
[Suzanne from Orange is the New Black]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Soul Caliber V]


__________________________________________________



05.
(Rick and Morty)


__________________________________________________



06.
[Love The Way You Lie - Eminem feat. Rihanna]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Bones]


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11. [SPOILERS for Grimm]
[WARNING for rape]



__________________________________________________



12. [WARNING for rape]

[Eddie Murphy, Bill Cosby]


__________________________________________________



13. [WARNING for incest/underage]



























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #435.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

I'm not ashamed of any of my controversial opinions, but I don't have many. The only one I can think of that really rustles jimmies is my beliefs on ~tagging hate~:

Character/ship hate is perfectly appropriate to put in the tags (on Tumblr). A tag such as "Pokemon" is a neutral subject descriptor, and "I hate Pikachu he sucks dicks" is perfectly on topic and appropriate to put in the Pokemon tag. If people don't like that, they can make a "positive Pokemon" or "for Pokemon fans" tag and then, any posts of "I hate Pikachu he sucks dicks" in it will be off-topic spam and violate Tumblr's TOS.

If people don't like the tags being used in the way Tumblr intends, they can utilize some other site with a community/group feature like Deviantart or Dreamwidth that can set aside a space for fans only.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

So....you're privileging the way a non-sentient website allegedly intended tags to be used over the way the community using that website has agreed to use tags? That seems both reasonable and productive.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

+1

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

So....you're privileging the way a non-sentient website allegedly intended tags to be used

It's fairly common to refer to a site's policies and changes by referring to the site name. (ex: "why Dreamwidth only allow 15 icons on a free account D:?" or "AAAHHHH why did Tumblr update again! This looks hideous"). Typically, people understand that those policies and changes are referring to the collective staff who implemented the changes or policies.

In other words, real live humans wrote the TOS, and real live humans intended the tags to be used that way.

to be used over the way the community using that website has agreed to use tags?

Most websites aren't democracies. The staff makes the decisions, not the will of the people.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

This is a really weird perspective. Obviously, the staff of any website is made up of real live humans making decisions about the operation of the website and the features available on that website. The question of tags, though, is about how to use the features that staff of real live humans provided.

For a lot of tumblr communities, what we might call the "staff-sanctioned" approach makes most sense. You post the thing, you tag it for organizational purposes/ease of searching, done. It's neat and logical.

But in fandom communities, the needs of users have led to a different consensus on how to use the website's features. Tags help fans to communicate and find each other on a website that's really not designed for connecting people to people so much as people to things.

That's why people get up in arms about using tags "correctly": if you're tagging hate with the tag adopted by the people who love that Thing (rather than, say, a tag that would help people who hate the thing to find your hate and share/glory in it), you may think that you're just identifying the subject of your post/providing an organizational tool or marker, but you're also, like it or not, effectively shoving hate in the face of people who follow that tag specifically because they like the thing. In DW terms, it's the equivalent of joining a comm just to post about how much you hate the thing it's devoted to.

Is this a universal consensus? Of course not; you disagree, clearly, and it's been known to generate some small amount of friction elsewhere. But it is, in my experience, agreed upon by the majority of tumblr users (in fandom, at least), and choosing to aggressively defend your minority opinion seems unnecessarily stubborn. What's gained, other than a sense of superiority and the chance to piss people off?

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

but why is ALL OF TUMBLR considered "a fandom community"

anyone random who is a Tumblr user and not part of "the fandom" could post and tag something "Pokemon"

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

True, and as you might note I did acknowledge in my earlier comment that of course, not all of tumblr is a fandom community. But fandom communities DO exist on tumblr, and I guess I'm assuming, considering the context this discussion is happening in, that we're talking about tagging within fandoms (that is, people posting negative opinions about a fandom they're active in).

Obviously, there are going to be posts in a tag from people outside the fandom. It's not a super regimented system, by any means. Nobody's really going to police every use of a fandom tag to make sure it ~meets the standards of the fandom (alert: sarcasm.)

What we're talking about is actually a much more straightforward issue. If you're making a post containing hate for a particular thing or character, if you KNOW that people who like that thing would rather people posting hate about it not use a particular tag......why do you need to use that tag? Surely, surely, that's just common courtesy.

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

considering the context this discussion is happening in, that we're talking about tagging within fandoms (that is, people posting negative opinions about a fandom they're active in).

You assumed incorrectly. People that are not in the fandom but are tagging hate will get as much ire as a person in fandom tagging hate; unless you're in a very small fandom people aren't going to go "Oh yeah that's Jean I know she's not in this fandom, I'll let it pass."

I don't think I've ever seen anyone argue for exceptions to the "do not hate!" argument.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

because it's relevant and not all tags come with explicit rules and no one has the right to enforce rules on a tag that isn't a community and able to be used by anyone???

you can't even compare it to posting hate on a dw community because dw communities don't have rules against hate, if you love the show but hated an episode you ARE allowed to post rants in most general communities about it unless it's bashing a character on a character-fan community or something

are you being purposely obtuse?? i cant even tell

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

if you're tagging hate with the tag adopted by the people who love that Thing

And that's my point. A generic series/character tag is not created or "adopted" by fans. That implies that they made that tag to communicate with other fans. A "pokemon fans" tag would fit that description. "Pokemon" does not.

There is nothing stopping anyone from making a fan tag or a positive tag. #steven galaxy exists and it's a fan-created tag for keeping porn away from minor's eyes. #positive asexual and #actuallyasexual were created to make spaces for asexuals, and to make spaces for positive posts so people could avoid seeing hate/criticism of asexuality.

In DW terms, it's the equivalent of joining a comm just to post about how much you hate the thing it's devoted to.

No, a DW fan comm is usually made explicitly for fans. A generic tag is not. If someone makes a fan tags "Wincest fans" "Pokemon fans" and someone posted hate in it, then that would be comparable.

and choosing to aggressively defend your minority opinion seems unnecessarily stubborn. What's gained, other than a sense of superiority and the chance to piss people off?

This is a thread for controversial opinions. I'm not sure how you can criticize someone for posting a controversial opinion here, like it's a rude action. This is a thread explicitly asking for opinions that are controversial or piss people off.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

This is a thread for controversial opinions. I'm not sure how you can criticize someone for posting a controversial opinion here, like it's a rude action. This is a thread explicitly asking for opinions that are controversial or piss people off.

NAYRT, but they're just...engaging? Controversy means people wanna talk about it!

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

Engaging it is fine. My response was responding to this part of their comment:

but it is, in my experience, agreed upon by the majority of tumblr users (in fandom, at least), and choosing to aggressively defend your minority opinion seems unnecessarily stubborn. What's gained, other than a sense of superiority and the chance to piss people off?

Saying that someone is "aggressively defending" their opinion, being "unnecessarily stubborn" by talking about it, and questioning why they're sharing their opinion (and speculating that only something bad could motivate sharing it)...reads like a criticism to me.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

To be clear: I'm not criticizing you for posting your opinion in this thread! That was a perfectly appropriate action. It's just that your opinion, as you rightly acknowledge, IS controversial, and I AM pissed off by it.

I agree that fan-made tags are a wonderful invention for circumventing this exact problem, and certainly there's some grey area. But it seems rather unfair to put the onus of creating new tags on the people who don't want to see hate for their Thing, rather than the people posting hate.

And that's the thing--we're not talking about posting generic discussion or harsh critiques; we're talking about hate. Why insist that hate has a place in the generic tag, whereas positive discussion/fanworks needs to establish a completely different tag (difficult to streamline on a website really, really not designed for communication)?

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

da

Yeah, I think it's so disingenuous when people (claim to) think that when people say "don't tag your hate", they mean "don't tag any discussion about this show ever."

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

But it seems rather unfair to put the onus of creating new tags on the people who don't want to see hate for their Thing, rather than the people posting hate.

And to me it seems rather unfair to put the onus of creating new tags on the people who just want to post their opinions/thoughts on a series/character, all because some people do not want to see opinions/feelings that contrast with their own.


And that's the thing--we're not talking about posting generic discussion or harsh critiques; we're talking about hate.

Nope nope nope.jpg. If you've ever been on Tumblr, you should know what most people mean by tagged hate--and that often is, anything critical of any aspect of a show or character.

Why insist that hate has a place in the generic tag, whereas positive discussion/fanworks needs to establish a completely different tag (difficult to streamline on a website really, really not designed for communication)?

I don't insist that. I would prefer a generic tag be used for all kinds of posts--positive posts, bland posts, negative posts--all of it. All of it is relevent in a generic tag. But...if you can't stand to see anything critical of the generic tag subject matter, the onus is on you to create a safe space for you and like-minded people.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

"the way the community using that website has agreed to use tags"

what

Tumblr is not a hivemind, there is no one big 'community'

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

DA

No community is a hivemind, and yet somehow they all still manage to have etiquette in place. Go figure.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

Well no, "all" of them don't, otherwise this wouldn't be a controversial issue. Some people have decided what the etiquette is, and others do not agree.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

Adding to what anon said... the etiquette doesn't really help when people can't decide what counts as hate in the first place. A lot of people in my fandoms think that hate = anything not being 100% positive even if the writer loves the canon/character.

Re: Anons need not apply

[feotakahari]

I did not expect this to be the most controversial opinion.

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

You'd think, if the majority felt that strongly about it, that they'd pick a place like DW, forums, or Reddit to do fandom on, where they wouldn't have to see critical stuff.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

If people feel the need to share their hate, then why can't they create tags specifically for that?

Why is the onus on the people not seeking hate to create alternate tags for the purpose of searching and organizing their fandoms or topics when the actual name itself is a perfectly good and neutral way of doing it?

Tumblr doesn't "intend" anything for its tagging system. If they did, it wouldn't be as dysfunctional as it (and its search system for that matter) is. It's simply a function of the site. How its used is down to the userbase, and most of the userbase think that tagging hate is an obnoxious and needlessly wanky thing to do.

Re: Anons need not apply

[blitzwing]

Why is the onus on the people not seeking hate to create alternate tags for the purpose of searching and organizing their fandoms or topics when the actual name itself is a perfectly good and neutral way of doing it?

There is no onus. They are perfectly welcome to use the generic general tag. No one is trying to restrict fans from posting positive, uncritical posts in the generic general tag.

Tumblr doesn't "intend" anything for its tagging system.

Yes, it does. That's why you can report non-relevant posts in a tag. That's a violation of the official Tumblr Community Guidelines.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

somewhat related to this, i think putting slashes or whatever in character/ship names so mobile users won't see their posts is stupid as hell.

Re: Anons need not apply

[(Anonymous)]

That's really strange. Why would you want to limit your audience like that? What's the rationale?