![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Subject line ganked from ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
elements. ETA: corinna_5 made the Barbara Kruger icon.
ignazwisdom said a bunch of things I believe about the inevitable visibility of fandom. I feel the need for an easily findable set of voices offering a corrective to the hoary Spock Ears cliches of nonfannish reporting. cesperanza said we need to own the servers; astolat said we need persistence; others said many other beautiful things and shrift even made me cry. Here is my tiny attempt:
I support the OTW because fandom is so big and varied that attempts to control it through legal threats tend to strike like a bolt of lightning out of a clear sky. It is terrifying, and it doesn't happen to fandom; it happens to specific fans. The risk is low, but that is small consolation to the recipient of a cease and desist letter – and too many people are afraid to play outside because of the low risk. In the past, I’ve worked with a number of fans who’ve received threat letters for fanworks, including people who probably would find each other’s (and my) fanfic puzzling at best and appalling at worst. They found me because they knew me, but there was no infrastructure. I want there to be an easy-to-find place for fans of any stripe to find information and assistance when the lightning strikes.
I support the OTW because I want there to be a multi-fandom archive that is nonprofit and persistent. I want the archive to be able to survive multiple changes in personnel; not to be dependent on a small group’s willingness to sustain the costs of hosting it in the long term; and to spend its money transparently, as required by US nonprofit law. I want an archive that accepts as much fannish content as possible. I want an archive that offers its software freely to anyone who wants to implement different rules for content. The archive won’t make everyone happy – “two fans, three opinions” is a good rule, except there are a lot more than two fans involved – but I love the idea that even the people it doesn’t make happy will have the option of using the software to make their own rules.
If you can, consider coming to code with us!
This post is part of Why I Joined OTW Week.
elements. ETA: corinna_5 made the Barbara Kruger icon.ignazwisdom said a bunch of things I believe about the inevitable visibility of fandom. I feel the need for an easily findable set of voices offering a corrective to the hoary Spock Ears cliches of nonfannish reporting. cesperanza said we need to own the servers; astolat said we need persistence; others said many other beautiful things and shrift even made me cry. Here is my tiny attempt:I support the OTW because fandom is so big and varied that attempts to control it through legal threats tend to strike like a bolt of lightning out of a clear sky. It is terrifying, and it doesn't happen to fandom; it happens to specific fans. The risk is low, but that is small consolation to the recipient of a cease and desist letter – and too many people are afraid to play outside because of the low risk. In the past, I’ve worked with a number of fans who’ve received threat letters for fanworks, including people who probably would find each other’s (and my) fanfic puzzling at best and appalling at worst. They found me because they knew me, but there was no infrastructure. I want there to be an easy-to-find place for fans of any stripe to find information and assistance when the lightning strikes.
I support the OTW because I want there to be a multi-fandom archive that is nonprofit and persistent. I want the archive to be able to survive multiple changes in personnel; not to be dependent on a small group’s willingness to sustain the costs of hosting it in the long term; and to spend its money transparently, as required by US nonprofit law. I want an archive that accepts as much fannish content as possible. I want an archive that offers its software freely to anyone who wants to implement different rules for content. The archive won’t make everyone happy – “two fans, three opinions” is a good rule, except there are a lot more than two fans involved – but I love the idea that even the people it doesn’t make happy will have the option of using the software to make their own rules.
If you can, consider coming to code with us!
This post is part of Why I Joined OTW Week.
Tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
(What I was thinking was not what you've said here, but that's fine - at least I'm less confused now.)
And this sharing, while perhaps not in the plan from the get-go, hasn't been advertised well. I'm not saying that this will fundamently change my stance on the OTW project, but it does affect how I think about it. So thank you for sharing that info.
- hg
From:
it is a vitally important issue that gets ignored
Naomi Novik, Oct 10, 2007 here for post (http://community.livejournal.com/otw_news/10668.html#cutid6).
From the start, they were talking about open source software. A lot was posted, so maybe it was lost in the flurry, but I'm not sure how they could have 'advertised' it any better. Naomi Novik was the creator of the program that's currently being used by a bunch of archives--and that was apparently also open source from the start.
My main critique of a lot of the criticisms is that much of what is being said shows that critics have not read much of what OTW has put out, and are criticizing them on grounds that are simply not true (they've done a lot of posting to clarify stances, positions, etc.)
It was always meant to be open source.
From the start.