Dana, are you saying it's subjectional how interesting meta-fandom is?

Now my head hurts.

I'm also getting a bit bent out of shape about your insistance that being a Buffista and posting in the Firefly thread makes me a member of the Firefly fandom. Don't I get to control what I am?

I'm a fan, in general. I'm a member of online fandom, in the largest sense: the interlocking communities that discuss television and movies and books online. I'm an active member of only one or two individual fandoms right now, neither of which is Firefly. And I don't find that participating in this thread negates that statement, since 75% of my content has been meta or OT rather than about Firefly itself.

Here's the thing, Kevin -- it's like the screen names. You have to let people define themselves. Let them name themselves, and accept what they tell you about themselves. Don't make assumptions or generalizations about what they're interested in or who or what they are. I have found that making generalizations about other people's motives or intent is the one certain way of pissing people off on the internet. Because you will always be wrong about someone.

(Besides, arguing with ita about the history of the Buffistas? Kind of a waste of effort. She built the board; she knows precisely what kind of community is and what we are about, if anyone does. Also, she can kill you with her pinkie. *g*)

For Nilly, when she pops back in here:

Yesterday your post about Serenity had 4060 hits. 1185 people came over from Whedonesque. People think you are shiny. I have plenty of bandwidth left.

Okay, let me clarify. How *I* define fandom isn't a terribly interesting subject. Or, in other words, I'm trying to say 'Look, it probably seems like I'm trolling here as this is going on and on'.

Allyson - fandom and ass cancer aren't exactly comparable on any levels. So shouldn't be compared.

People can label themselves as they choose. They have every right to, and I'm all for that. It doesn't mean I agree with their labeling of themselves, however.

The fact that mocking of the fandom is so rife on Buffistas (along with many other sites) is because people box those fans into a fandom group. Browncoats. Craxy fans. It's all out there.

In many cases those labels apply in terms of the context people mean them in - but not always. I don't think being labeled as part of the fandom is in any way an insult. I think Allyson is part of the fandom because she is extremely close to it. I don't think she has ass cancer. I think Tim is also part of the fandom, by definition, because he creates fandoms.

I think Tim is also part of the fandom, by definition, because he creates fandoms.

I'd disagree with this. Show folk are beyond the fandom, in my opinion. They may find fandom takes shape around them, but that doesn't equal membership in it. Just as my following this thread doesn't equal membership in the Firefly fandom -- I define the level of my involvement in something, and based on the fact that I could barely make it through two episodes of the show, I think I fall short of being part of the fandom. But I do dig thoughtful discussions, which is why I lurk here.

That, and the opportunity to see ass cancer worked into said thoughtful discussions.

As for the "rife" "mocking," we must be looking at different threads. All I saw was a discussion of one comment, and an analysis of why some, like me, found the person's post somewhat overdramatic, while others found it fandomly, to borrow a phrase. I thought the discussion was rather interesting.

But I *know* that there are people posting quite merrily here who aren't part of fandom, and some of them are on show threads.

Ooh! Ooh! Me!! As you can see me posting here, and yet I am not part of fandom. I am a casual fan of a lot of media, as well as a casual fan of meta-fandom. I mean, I'll read fandom_wank, but I'll never post there.

I think Allyson is part of the fandom because she is extremely close to it.

But what about the Lost example -- she was contracted to do a service for the fandom, without being part of it at all.

The thing is, Tim joins in the debate about the intentions of his shows quite often, discussing it with members of the fandom. I'd define that as to entering the fandom. If Tim's offended or remotely bothered by the prospect of being considered part of the fandom I don't know.

If Tim wasn't posting here or elsewhere online, I wouldn't consider him engaging the fandom. Show runners by default, I agree, aren't automatically part of any fan movement - but those who engage the fans enter into that movement.

ETA: Lost example - I wouldn't suggest Allyson is part of the Lost fandom. Because she's very clear she doesn't actually like it, and only engaged it to organise a party as far as I know.

Or, in other words, I'm trying to say 'Look, it probably seems like I'm trolling here as this is going on and on'.

I think you're right about this. Sometimes when having a conversation about a group of people with that group of people, as more and more grow offended by how they're being described and characterized, there comes a point when it's wiser to step away rather than repeatedly attempt to justify your interpretation and risk further offense.

Separate from whether an individual is part of fandom or not, since that's a self-definition thing, where do people see the lines between fans and fandom. I don't know myself. Going to Cons says Fandom to me, but I've never been to one and I could be wrong.