On Fanlore, users with accounts can edit pages including user pages, can create pages, and more. Any information you publish on a page or an edit summary will be accessible by the public and to Fanlore personnel. Because Fanlore is a wiki, information published on Fanlore will be publicly available forever, even if edited later. Be mindful when sharing personal information, including your religious or political views, health, racial background, country of origin, sexual identity and/or personal relationships. To learn more, check out our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Select "dismiss" to agree to these terms.
Talk:PETJA
Should be renamed to PETJA. --Kyuuketsukirui 14:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. My bad.Sherrold 18:17, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
\o/ Theoret to the rescue! Now I can strike 'research PETJA article' off my to-do list ;D It only needs a few more links or quotes. --lian 01:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I was a member of capslock_spn when PETJA was first conceived, so I have some familiarity with it beyond just the wank (I also have some deeply biased views on how the situation went down, but I tried not to let that show in the article *g*). Tracking down quotes from anywhere other than the fandom_wank entry might be difficult though, as a lot of PETJA-related information is now deleted or flocked. --Theoret 02:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- oh, yes, sure. I just remember reading the 'skeptical' vs. 'solidarity' posts, so one could link to those, I don't know. I'd love to hear your deeply biased views -- as long as you don't frame them as Teh Truth, that's a-ok! --lian 03:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I would love to see screen shots, frankly.--Sherrold 03:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- My biased views pretty much just boil down to me being very firmly in the 'there was a C&D letter' camp, despite not being privvy to any of the details. The founder of the website only discussed the details with a handful of people, but I have some of those people on my flist, and based on how they handled the situation... well. I am familiar with how those people behave when capslock_spn is orchestrating dumb pranks, and, personally, I am 100% certain this was not a case of that happening. There was also quite a bit of less prominent fallout after the wank, featuring several people whose squee was very, very harshed by the incident, and I believe the atmosphere would have been completely different if it was a case of 'fandom successfully duped' rather than 'my methods of fangirling have just been condemned by the object of my squee'. I can definitely see why a lot of people are skeptical, but I do tend to think that's because their knowledge of PETJA is limited to just how it ended. --Theoret 04:17, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think it would be fantastic to have this on the page, as a part of a -- I don't know, solidarity vs skepticism, or controvery, section, or how would you call it? And someone else from the other side of the argument could then fill in their POV. I believe the result would be much more rewarding than trying to steer clear of subjectivity and making it wishy-washy and less insightful in the process. What do you think? --lian 18:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)