I am glad you're not sorry about the OP. It was obviously not intended for the same set of uses as the FAQ, as you say. And I see from the posts above why it might be easier in this case than in some others to suspect bad faith on the part of anyone whose arguments sound even remotely like those. I apologize for playing into the scenario inadvertently. (I'm sheltered; I see that now.)
About this: anybody who says meta is not fandom needs to go study the history of fandom when, back in the day, like the 1920s, most fanzines were meta, and NOT fanfiction
You once made a related point, or the obverse point, maybe, to the effect that fans who think that fannish commentary (as opposed to fic) isn't fanwriting are kidding themselves. I think it was in the course of a discussion on concrit. I really loved that, and look forward to OTW's handling of it -- even outside the formalities of the journal -- because it would be absolutely prodigious to have an archive that included it as well as the more standard forms of art.
Shorter: Damn right I want my meta included with the fanwork I archive at OTW.
no subject
About this: anybody who says meta is not fandom needs to go study the history of fandom when, back in the day, like the 1920s, most fanzines were meta, and NOT fanfiction
You once made a related point, or the obverse point, maybe, to the effect that fans who think that fannish commentary (as opposed to fic) isn't fanwriting are kidding themselves. I think it was in the course of a discussion on concrit. I really loved that, and look forward to OTW's handling of it -- even outside the formalities of the journal -- because it would be absolutely prodigious to have an archive that included it as well as the more standard forms of art.
Shorter: Damn right I want my meta included with the fanwork I archive at OTW.