Talk:Fandom

That IP address was me. I figured since you have this entry just dripping with snark including "Bayformers", it should include the inexplicable fan belief that early G1 had more realistic representations of extraterrestrial robots, even though the toy engineers made them to look like the human-built piloted mecha they were in their original toy lines. -Rotty 18:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oooh. Your edit didn't say anything about extraterrestrials, so, I totally didn't know where you were going.  I personally prefer the line more brief, without bringing that part in, but, I don't feel real strongly about it.  If you put it back in I might edit the phrasing to make it more to my liking, though.  :)  --Steve-o 19:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I know that someone from Hasbro (Whatshername, the exec who used to work for Power Rangers?) mentioned at some point that they estimate that X% of Transformers toys are bought by adult collectors- and I think it was 20. That should probably be in here.

I admit, I find the tone of this article unnecessarily harsh. I'd like to see it either moderated, or to have Fans and Fandom made two separate articles, with most of the negative aspects assigned to fandom. (Which I think is a fair division of blame- you still hear stories of hardcore transfans who run into the occasional hardcore solo-fan who has no clue about the 'net, conventions etc. The really nasty negative aspects of fans are almost all group behaviors that feed on themselves and doesn't exist in individuals if a fan is removed from fandom.)

...oh my god, I just articulated a romantacist belief in the fundamental goodness of humanity and the corrupting influence of society on individuals. '''KILL ME NOW! DO IT BEFORE I SPREAD PEACE AND LOVE ALL OVER THE WIKI!''' -Derik 20:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Was that Michelle Fields? --FFN 13:44, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I also greatly dislike the tone of this article. It gives the impression that we here at this Wiki somehow stand separate and apart from the "fandom" which it sarcastically ridicules. Were it up to me, everything on this page but the short History section would be removed. --KilMichaelMcC 02:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I find this article totally hilarious and that it contains quite a lot of truths.

I'm okay with the link. --ItsWalky 03:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I admit to being a little surprised at the negative reactions, as this is all stuff that's already written in various places on this wiki. Still, I recognize that if my only supporter is an anonymous string of numbers, I apparently just have a weird opinion on it. I just talked to Walky about it and he said the sarcastic "accomplishments"list could maybe be preserved if it were just a small part of a large, otherwise focusing-on-the-positive article. That sounds okay to me... I'd kind of like to keep at least some of the list in there, but, again, I seemingly have no perception of how vicious what I wrote is, so maybe it should be totally scrapped. For now I'll call shenanigans on myself while we decide what to do. --Steve-o 03:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep it. I read some seriously ridiculous crap in the past week that makes this page DESERVE existence.  Oh yeah, and it needs a mention of terrible fanfiction in there, since nothing is free from terrible fanfiction.--MCRG 05:35, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This article is just full of win. Reading it totally made my day. I say keep it. Detour 06:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't have a problem witht he negativity of the article per-se... it just seems kinda down on fans unless there's some contrasting material to balance it out. -Derik 07:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Pretty much all of the snark and negativity on display in the current version is depressingly close to the truth, but I for one would certainly like to see it balanced out with stuff about the more positive aspects of TF fandom. --TVsGrady 00:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It currently bears an uncanny resemblence to Encyclopedia Dramatica. -Rotty 08:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been my observation that other fandoms, particularly the GI Joe fandom (probably owing to TF's close relationship with Joe), think TF fans are absolutely fucking insane. --FFN 13:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The Sonic The Hedgehog fandom makes Transformers, G. I. Joe or basically anyone else look like rank amateurs in the insanity department. I am dead serious as hilarious as it might sound.  Death threats and talk of character rape is how you say "hello" over there.--MCRG 04:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I am in favor of the article staying in its present state, as a reminder against such foolish behavior. It made my day reading the Fandom section, and under the management's rule that "THE FUNNY STAYS.", it should be here. Ronimus Prime 03:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I say keep it. It reminds fans not to take themselves too seriously. In fact, maybe even add a note on the whole "Who is Cyclonus" thing. 67.160.13.149 22:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

This whole page sounds like another one of Walky's idiotic rants against the fandom. Snore. Why don't people make fun of the anti-fans like Walky more often, when the things they say and do are far more ridiculous as they can't be defended by "Well, he's a crazy fan"?

There
Now it is fair and balanced.

What to do with this page?
As this page has, as was pretty much inevitable, now gotten worse and even MORE ueseless, I would like to re-iterate my previous position that everything other than the brief history section should be removed. --KilMichaelMcC 18:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * If we're going to keep the page at all, I think we should keep our new friend's contribution. Don't edit it or clean it up, leave it at his reading level. Chip 18:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The page should never have existed anyway, and since there's no justification for removing this anonymous crybaby's sixth-grade ranting about how the smart kids don't like him without removing the part making fun of the shit-for-brains who make up the loudest part of this and every fandom, I agree that it should be minimized or removed. Any sufficiently official and important aspect of fandom (ie BotCon) has its own place on the wiki anyway. -LV 18:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Guys I'm ranting about are the "smart kids"? You're kidding, right? For a start, if they were the smarter ones, their arguments would be the more detailed ones. The fact that mine trailed on is simply down to the fact that I've spent more time on my arguments. How are the people whining about the fans any better? What's wrong with complaining? Why do you have to attach weighted terms in it? And if I'm so dumb, how did I know I'd be able to catch you out like this, as you say, you can't remove mine without removing his?


 * That you admit that it's ranting is enough. Veil your complaints in sarcasm and witty banter and we'll talk.--Carrion 18:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The fact that you trailed on is a testament to how boring you are, kid. Brevity is the soul of wit. Chip 18:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, I for one would like to see this page actually turned into something useful. It could have information on the fandom references in Beast Wars, the fan artists and writers who have gone on to do official work, things like that. --KilMichaelMcC 18:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

As absolutely fucking hilarious as the page just became, I agree with the above notions. We either need to delete the whole schebang (frankly, I never found the page to really be necessary at all to begin with) or, as Kil notes, take the route of making it a "hub" page for the big fan-stuff turned "official", with a note about its GENERAL history (starting on USENET, move to messageboards, MUSHes, etc). --M Sipher 18:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd rather we leave it exactly as it is, with both arguments. However, there shouldn't be an artificial argument here. The person with the most convincing argument should be allowed to have it shine if it really is more convincing.


 * And I honestly believe there is just much more "shit" on the fan-haters than the fans themselves. They really are a joke.


 * I don't mean it to be too horribly mean since a lot of my friends do engage in some of the things I list, but considering what I was responding to, and the level of bullying in the community, I really did feel a no-holds barred rebuttal was necessary. There is already enough of this rubbish within the fandom itself, if this place is so seperate it should know better. The most ridiculous thing about the fandom is without about those within it who are bitter, horrid and vicious in their criticism of their fellow fans. No amount of complaining about Michael Bay or Bumblebee not being a VW can ever compete with that, and it's about time the fandom started realising it.


 * I genuinely feel that some people have gone much too far, and don't realise or don't care about the damage they're doing on the community. Boards like TFW2005 and Allspark are far too strict for there ever to be any kind of "Uprising". If there is to be any kind of opposition, or at least equal footing with these people, it needs to be here, where it's lax. I do have little reason to respect people like Walky as long as they continue to mock and spread bile about me and people who share my views directly and indirectly through their "humour" or message board posts.


 * I will consider removing some of the harsher ones, like the one about people liking the movie. I actually quite liked the movie but I was bothered by the scrap-heap designs and poor script and humour. It just really bothers me that something that's objectively not the greatest thing ever is pushed on people in the manner that it is throughout the fandom. I remain adamant that a lot of the support of the movie within the fanbase is down to hype and peer pressure.


 * You're a very angry man who doesn't seem to realize that the article was intended to be one giant joke where we mock our own fanboyishness (word?). Seek help. -- SFH 18:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I love the assumption that people who pour their time and energy into the wiki aren't fans, but people whose only interest is to scream and whine until they get banned from the big message boards (and I don't know who this guy is, but COME ON) are the real fans. And it's all everyone else's fault but his. Chip 18:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hold on, why is the other "joke" acceptable and not mine? Mine is much more "Jokey" in tone. You mean "seek help" because I fail to conform to your side of the supposed "humour". I've found in my experience on sites like ED that these kind of articles are often a lot more genuine than they seem, with some light tone tacked on so they can get away with it on the grounds of parody. You're not mocking yourselves - people like Walky, Sipher, while sometimes mocking themselves in different ways, set themselves out from the people they mock or "correct". There is a split between between "Fanboy" and "Anti-fan" which is very similiar to the supporters and detractors of the movie. This article is a result of that split - it's not fans making fun of themselves, it's fans making fun of other fans.


 * That fact that you said a guy who wrote this was writting Child Pornoprophy set off a few alarms. Then there's is that fact that it came of vitriolic and with more swearing that one would expect from a series aimed toward kids. That's where you may need to seek help. -- SFH 18:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The Child Pornography thing was a joke, since "Shortpacked" sounds like a euphanism(fudge packing, children are short, whatever). It was just something I dropped in to show that what I'd written was somewhat tounge in cheek, and also to dislodge the idea that Shortpacked itself should be taken as the accurate, witty observational humour some people make it out to be.. I can always change that, but I doubt enough children use this Wiki to notice. Not that you care - your recent actions prove you're biased as hell with no respect for decent argument or opposition.

Okay, seriously, Walky, stop it. It isn't funny anymore to pretend to be a complete idiot who compares your comic to child porn.

Okay, maybe its a little funny, but its irritating that it needs clean up so often. -


 * Walky would never post something like this since it contains near-irrefutable points against some of his arguments. Not to mention you're using his tactics trying to discredit someone by calling them an "idiot" instead of proving their argument wrong.

Seriously, Willis, we get it by now.

Ha ha, fake person even thinks their arguments have merit. The joke's getting old.

Okay seriously, what to do with this page?
Since the above section was derailed, let's get down to it. What should this article be?

As funny as I think the venting was, I just don't think it benefits the wiki as a whole. I think we'd be better off with a more neutral opening paragraph, a link to Transformers timeline, the existing link to the Fandom category, and nothing else.

I further think that while adding/restoring the funny to this article should be encouragedn any vandalism to support a particular viewpoint (which the original article didn't even do) should be bannable. Same goes for anyone who wants to spam us about their awesome message board which is totally the hub of all TF fandom. Chip 19:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, sounds reasonable so-far, with maybe a warning first. Still doesn't solve the central argument. chiasaur11 12:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Is this what the thoughts of someone with Asperger's sound like? One that really gets me is "You are the dirt beneath Aaron Archer's feat. (sic)" Have you ever been to a BotCon? I just can't imagine how a fan could have ever spoken to someone like Archer or Greg Lombardo - as a human being, not as a Santa Claus machine to request future gifts from - and have seething hatred like this. They're hard-working, creative people who go to work in the morning trying to make the most fun, highest-quality lines possible. Then anywhere from nine months to a well over a year before their upcoming work hits and has a chance to win over kids and general audiences, the fans start ripping into it with full vitriol on the basis of the earliest images and, year after year, build up snarling personal loathing for them individually. Nothing makes you look worse than heaping hatred on living, breathing people because they didn't put out the exact toys you want. -Rotty 19:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Rotty, you have no sense of humour. And remember, sense of humour isn't just what you find funny but also how much leeway you're willing to give other people's attempts at being so. There is no hatred directed towards Mr. Archer here. It's meant to be a parody of the way in which some people make it out like fans shouldn't matter in the least when it comes to how Hasbro(or Paramount) do things. It is pretty obvious to anyone that understands the terminology. Of course Mr. Archer does not treat people like that, it's part of the absurdity. And please do not keep reverting my contributions. It's just getting very immature.


 * Quite frankly I'm disgusted that some people keep trying to revert this before it's been properly discussed. It's already been established that if you remove my rot, you have to remove the original rot too. At least mine is much better planned out rot, yet it's still cast as the bad rot because it goes against the current mentality of this place. I am also not fond of Sipher calling my contribution "dumber", but since he was one of the guys I was rallying against it's not surprising he'd do that instead of defending himself properly.

Ya happy now? There's almos nothing. Sipher wiped out the article. It's fair. Now please leave.-chiasaur11 12:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This rubbish and rot is all a trifle walrus. -Rotty 19:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I just want to say that as someone who thought the original version of this article, something I had nothing to do with, was a bit much, it's really funny to see people claim this was all my doing. --ItsWalky 19:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)