case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2019-02-28 07:00 pm

[ SECRET POST #4438 ]


⌈ Secret Post #4438 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #635.
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.

(Anonymous) 2019-03-01 12:51 am (UTC)(link)
Internet usernames and white guy using a Japanese penname at his writing gig at a big comic book company are two COMPLETELY different things.

Why are people so allergic to nuance and context?

(Anonymous) 2019-03-01 01:02 am (UTC)(link)
If we're going to discuss specific shades of nuance and word choice, the tweet in OP says "a name that you put on all your social media handles", not "a username".

NAYRT

(Anonymous) 2019-03-03 01:34 am (UTC)(link)
... A "social media handle" is literally a username for a social media site.

(Anonymous) 2019-03-01 01:27 am (UTC)(link)
A social media handle isn't a writing gig at a big comic company.

(Anonymous) 2019-03-01 02:13 am (UTC)(link)
Why are people so allergic to nuance and context?

Because the posted secret makes no mention of a "white guy using a Japanese penname at his writing gig at a big comic book company".

You cannot accurately claim people are allergic to nuance and context when no context or nuance was provided in the original post.

(Anonymous) 2019-03-01 02:37 am (UTC)(link)
NAYRT

I understand what you're saying but I also think that the interpretation of the tweet that secret!OP made, in the secret itself, was pretty tenuous. Especially because secret!OP presumably did have access to the context of the original tweet, whatever it was.