Another day in the set
Jul. 27th, 2006 12:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
silveradeptRained out again. Somehow, that seems to be the luck of the draw this season. Lots of rainouts.
Something many people knew... in my opinion, it only makes it ironic that he was cast for Sephiroth's voice. Lance Bass likes boys. And it's all over the newsspace. Probably a distracting thing to keep people away from bigger issues.
Altercation with Scientology adherent leads to "Warning" posters appearing. Very suspicious. If they are, indeed misdemeanors, then it's not something to be overly worried about, and certainly not worth the expense of flyers. Makes me wonder just who's trying to put on who.
The Journal of 9/11 Studies is on-line. Even through threats, apparently, some have decided to publish. Go have a look and see if it's conspiracy-theory nonsense or solid science.
A xombie pub crawl ends up in arrests for suspected WMDs. So the shuffling, and calling out "Braaaaains" somehow didn't work? Getting tough these days to do anything that's creative or outside-the-box without someone trying to arrest or censor you for it.
An era is finishing - namely, Monopoly is switching over to a plastic card system and abandoning the cash. This probably won't make Monopoly a better game to play, or any shorter, but what it will do is add more calculators, batteries, and other such to the game. More parts to break, and less math to be done in the head.
Additional stuff and trying-to-make-sense: Today, although the source material has since vanish't into the ether (well, not the original source, which I suspect still exists, but the source that brought it to my attention), I got to thinking about malicious usage of characters and the expanses to which some people may go to make attacks. It's sort of the "Calvin pissing on X" situation. Watterson would definitely not approve of anything like that, yet it's ubiquitous enough that I'm sure most people recognize the image I'm talking about. How much of an image like that is created in "good fun" or parody sorts of material and how much of it is malice, taking the beautiful art and spraying it with graffiti, to attack the person, and how much of it is pure fuckery, defacing it because it's there and people will get a rise out of it. It happened to someone who could pass as this generation's Watterson, taking a relatively recently formed avatar and placing it in a very NC-17 rated scene. It felt like an attack, although there were some dinks who said it was "just Internet, stop paying attention and it'll go away" and others who said "these people will do these things, deal with it." Insensitive remarks, both of them, and their utterers received a just and fitting reward for them. Someone else attempted to post the image in question. Said posts were removed. Admittedly, the person who was affected by all this didn't really want to have such things brought to their attention, but once done, it had an effect on them.
So does pr0nifying a charcter count as a parody/fair use thing? Is it always intentionally malicious (discarding the cases where the original author welcomes pr0nification) toward the creator, or is it more of the second sort that's just lashing out for attention? What to do about such things? Do we just chalk it up to Internet-Beta and try not to let it affect us? Or something else?
I guess what I don't really understand the most is why such an idea would come to someone's mind, and then, secondly, why it would be acted upon, and finally, posted for the world and the original author to see, likely with the "See what I did!" sort of pride.
Anyway, g'night. There will likely be something else to talk about tomorrow.
Something many people knew... in my opinion, it only makes it ironic that he was cast for Sephiroth's voice. Lance Bass likes boys. And it's all over the newsspace. Probably a distracting thing to keep people away from bigger issues.
Altercation with Scientology adherent leads to "Warning" posters appearing. Very suspicious. If they are, indeed misdemeanors, then it's not something to be overly worried about, and certainly not worth the expense of flyers. Makes me wonder just who's trying to put on who.
The Journal of 9/11 Studies is on-line. Even through threats, apparently, some have decided to publish. Go have a look and see if it's conspiracy-theory nonsense or solid science.
A xombie pub crawl ends up in arrests for suspected WMDs. So the shuffling, and calling out "Braaaaains" somehow didn't work? Getting tough these days to do anything that's creative or outside-the-box without someone trying to arrest or censor you for it.
An era is finishing - namely, Monopoly is switching over to a plastic card system and abandoning the cash. This probably won't make Monopoly a better game to play, or any shorter, but what it will do is add more calculators, batteries, and other such to the game. More parts to break, and less math to be done in the head.
Additional stuff and trying-to-make-sense: Today, although the source material has since vanish't into the ether (well, not the original source, which I suspect still exists, but the source that brought it to my attention), I got to thinking about malicious usage of characters and the expanses to which some people may go to make attacks. It's sort of the "Calvin pissing on X" situation. Watterson would definitely not approve of anything like that, yet it's ubiquitous enough that I'm sure most people recognize the image I'm talking about. How much of an image like that is created in "good fun" or parody sorts of material and how much of it is malice, taking the beautiful art and spraying it with graffiti, to attack the person, and how much of it is pure fuckery, defacing it because it's there and people will get a rise out of it. It happened to someone who could pass as this generation's Watterson, taking a relatively recently formed avatar and placing it in a very NC-17 rated scene. It felt like an attack, although there were some dinks who said it was "just Internet, stop paying attention and it'll go away" and others who said "these people will do these things, deal with it." Insensitive remarks, both of them, and their utterers received a just and fitting reward for them. Someone else attempted to post the image in question. Said posts were removed. Admittedly, the person who was affected by all this didn't really want to have such things brought to their attention, but once done, it had an effect on them.
So does pr0nifying a charcter count as a parody/fair use thing? Is it always intentionally malicious (discarding the cases where the original author welcomes pr0nification) toward the creator, or is it more of the second sort that's just lashing out for attention? What to do about such things? Do we just chalk it up to Internet-Beta and try not to let it affect us? Or something else?
I guess what I don't really understand the most is why such an idea would come to someone's mind, and then, secondly, why it would be acted upon, and finally, posted for the world and the original author to see, likely with the "See what I did!" sort of pride.
Anyway, g'night. There will likely be something else to talk about tomorrow.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 11:30 am (UTC)The Calvin peeing on X thing has alawys annoyed me. Calvin is supposed to be a cute, adorable, chilren's character and not an evil, malicious bastard. It was actually kind of funny - I was talking to a Penn Stater who happened to see my car now with the M block next to the PSU Alum sticker and suggested I get "that little boy peeing" to go with the M...they had no idea it was Calvin, and once I told them they were shocked that such an innocent character gets portrayted in that way.
I also recal a trip to DC when I was in 7th grade and a T-shirt we saw that had Calvin on the front and some kind of mean phrase on it, but Ican't recall what exactly it said.
It's kind of like the sexy-ifiyng of Tinkerbell or the nasty-fiying of Tweety Bird. I think it's highly innapropriate, and sends kids the wrong messages. Even Harry Potter "fan art" that's NC-17 annoys me, as well as a good portion of the fan fiction that's out there without restrictions on who is allowed to read it. At least places like the restricted section force you to create a log in that verifies your age (we won't get into how you can lie about that).
I don't think it's malicious in most cases. Innapropriate, yes, but malicious? Probably not. Most of the time I'm sure it's the second artist just not thinking that their image could be offensive and is more of a "look! i like your stuff! this si what i did!"
Oh, and Lance is gay? Haven't we known that since....1998 or so?
no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 11:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 11:38 am (UTC)One of the reasons I left the FMA community was largely because of the sudden surge of NC-17 related stories and drawings that I found to be incredibly innapropriate...heck, oneo f my freinds wrote ZOO FICTION about the characters...but if you asked any of them, they all thought they were doing something OK.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 11:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 11:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-27 12:20 pm (UTC)If one person is willing to write a thing, and another person is willing to read that thing, how can interference in this process of supply and demand be justified?
*bristles at all hints at a central authority of some sort assuming itself superior to the individual judgement of the people whose lives it's restricting, for whichever flawed justification*
no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 02:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-28 08:01 am (UTC)(*and self-responsibility, in at least one arena in the world...!*)
M) Idiot. If you have to get a central authority to allow your freedom, then it's no freedom at all. They can still step in at any time, and there's not a thing you can do about it.