Loyality in fandom does urk me a bit, but the fact people are pulling apart the alledged strangeness/wankyness/etc of an overly long sentence is no less strange/wanky/etc.

I like to think of Buffistas as fandom fans. We're sometimes (or always?) part of it, we're often scared by it, occasionally we swear it off completely, but we can't stop staring at the train wreck that fandom can be whenever it rears its ugly head.

Then again, maybe I just need to get more sleep.

but we can't stop staring at the train wreck that fandom can be whenever it rears its ugly head.

If trains wouldn't rear their heads then they wouldn't get wrecked so much.

Then again, maybe I just need to get more sleep.

Um... me too.

Well, I view every single person here (including myself) as part of that fandom. Of course, people here can generally spell, however.

two, assuming that noting relevant details to properly evaluate the movie can *only* be done by "loyal browncoats"

To be fair, I think it's saying that this *will* only be done by them, not that it *can* only. But I'm pretty much with you on the rest of it. It doesn't really annoy so much as make me cringe a little, though.

So I should stop calling shrift "shrift"?

That would be odd. Although if you want to square quote me all next weekend, I'll laugh.

Shrift's real name is shrift, and I don't care what her driver's license says.

It says I'm F and 5'4" and have brown eyes that need corrective lenses. All true!

That statement isn't pretentious, I think, it's just fandomly.

Making excessive claims of value isn't unusual to fandom. Or anywhere else, really. I've certainly done it myself. Sometimes it rubs me wrong, like a fannish call to arms that sounds like poetry I wrote when I was 15 and convinced nobody understood my secret pain.

Yeah, like that.

It's the sort of sentence that defeats itself as it's spoken.

Allyson, it was somebody here who suggested it should be put in front of JW's nose.

That was me, last night, and (I went back and checked my post) I said "Joss needs to see this," in the sense that, if someone raves about your work, *really* gets it, it would be nice for them to know.

I didn't mean Whedonesque it, or e-mail it to Joss, or anything specific. Otherwise, I would have said so, in specific terms.

(And even if I had said so, in specific terms, I don't speak for Nilly or this board or Shrift and her bandwidth.)

I don't think linking something from Whedonesque is in any way dodgy. Traffic wise, it'll be a few hundred hits. People there enjoyed the review. Apparently we're the people wanking about the quote marks and other peoples phrasing of love for something (aka fandom).

Traffic wise, it'll be a few hundred hits.

Actually, I get thousands anytime Whedonesque links to anything on my site.

People there probably didn't focus on the quote marks, because Nilly is a Buffista. I think it makes sense that Buffistas comment on it. Others don't know her. Buffistas do.

I don't think linking something from Whedonesque is in any way dodgy

It's jacked with our usage levels -- that's why we're usually cited indirectly.