[ SECRET POST #4563 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4563 ⌋

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

01.
[XKCD's What If?]



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
[Poirot/Columbo]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 08 secrets from Secret Submission Post #653.
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)]

Sure, I see your point. I think the line I'm trying to draw is, if someone is responding to a critique based on the content of that critique, obviously that's fine and totally above board. Either side might be right or wrong on the merits, that's just how arguments work.

But I think there's a specific kind of response to criticism that attacks it for being criticism, not for the content of what is being said. And that's something that I think can become a problem, especially when people respond to content-full criticism as though it were harassment. People should be able to air out their criticism or point of view without being unreasonably attacked for it, just like fans should be able to do fandom without being unreasonably attacked by it.

[(Anonymous)]

*standing ovation*

OP

[(Anonymous)]

People should be able to air out their criticism or point of view without being unreasonably attacked for it, just like fans should be able to do fandom without being unreasonably attacked by it.

That's exactly what I mean when I say live and let live. Thank you.