Yemi Hikari

I've not visited you guys in awhile, so there's a lot to comb through.

I mean it's like you have nothing better to do than harass others on this site.

I always find it interesting that these writers talk about having nothing better to do with their time, yet they're the ones who don't want to take the time to follow the site rules. The last time I checked "having nothing better to do with your time" is a phrase used to indicate a person is wasting their time doing useless things. Making an attempt to help another person even when that person doesn't want help is never a waste of time, though at times it can be fruitless. The ones who mention you're wasting their time are more spot on, but it honestly speaks a lot more about that particular person saying it than anybody in the CU because the truth is they're honestly wasting their time doing the fandom thing. Part of following the rules of any site is about being a part of the community, yet many want praise without putting the work in. Not all of them, but the not all of them tend not to be the ones making excuses and instead end up correcting their mistakes a whole lot quicker.

Based on the reviews on this story, how does it feel getting criticized?

I've said this before and I'll say it again. Critique hurts. The fact it hurts does not though justify lashing out at people for telling you the truth. Critique doesn't hurt because your being bullied, but if you think critique constitutes bulling you've got a lot of growing up to do particularly if you're an adult saying that. It hurts because you're hearing the truth about yourself but more particularly in this case your work. What really floors me is the ones I see typically complaining honestly have never gotten some of the critique I've gotten on and offline regarding my writing. Seriously - getting called out for rule breaking is minor in regards to critique which in turn makes their question down right insulting but what they're doing is throwing a tantrum.

You probably do this in real life and you decided to do it on the internet.

I was simply going to say that yes, I do call people out for breaking the rules offline and almost used the words "real life" like they did, because yes, I do call people out for not doing what they're supposed to be doing. That happens in "real life" which isn't this fictional ideal these people have made up regardless of a person's position in life. I work with kids so I'm constantly calling them out for breaking rules, but I'm also in a position to punish, yet in that same setting I see kids warning their peers not to break the rules because they don't want their friends getting in trouble because that's what a friend does. In a work setting a boss will come down on those who don't follow company policy but on the other side employees can warn their fellow employees or even report behavior including the behavior of their bosses if it breaks the law.

That's how real life works - you don't get to do whatever you want because that's anarchy. For society to function it needs rules, but to say "it's not fair" because you don't get what you want really means you're being self-centered.

More importantly here - the internet IS a part of REAL LIFE. The fact they think it is not means this person thinks the whole internet interaction thing is just a game when it's not. Fanfic writing isn't a game; if you dig into its history back when it started as a fanzine that the vast majority treated it as a serious endeavor. Of course, back then someone under the age of eighteen was also a major anomaly given that fanzines were a function of conventions and the vast majority of those who went were adults and not kids. Most fanfic writers still think this way, but I've found those who treat it as a game don't last long or grow out of it.

Reviewer four has not reviewed my stories before, but apparently, they dislike my writing enough to vent about it in another person's review section and I think managed to echo the sentiments of everyone else "please rate it M."

People really shouldn't make assumptions regarding another person's writing without actually checking it out. I've had people claim I'm jealous of the number of reviews, yet if you look at my stories you'll definitely find plenty which have more reviews than the stories in question. Some claim I dislike AUs when I call out work for being original fiction and not fanfic, yet I've written quite a few AUs and have quite a few on my favorites list. Also, saying they "like" a story has no merit when everyone knows Twilight was well liked yet very poorly written and pretty much amounts to "I like trashy writing over those who are putting a serious endeavor into what they write."

I'm sorry, I'm trying my best...

I'm dyslexic and as someone with dyslexia I am going to say they're lying not only to you Warg but themselves. Saying they are is insulting to those with an actual learning disability because we're at least able to get things such as proper end punctuation and quotations right.

I can't completely change up the format...

Bull and yet another insult to those of us with a learning disability. There is a nice chapter replace system.

I just hope your enjoying it...

Except how can anybody enjoy it when the grammatical errors they have effect readability of all things?

I'm just another story writer like you...

I hate saying this, but I don't consider people who refuse to do the most basic grammar in their stories without having a VERY good reason for breaking the rules of which the rules of the site trump those reasons every single time to be writers. Writing is about communicating and part of that is using proper grammar in the most basic sense.

Alright fine, but if you get confused later on, that's on you Because confusion is all the readers' fault when the format is awful and nobody's changed chapter order ever.

As someone with dyslexia I find this response of theirs insulting. There are certain things such as an overuse of pronouns say - when both characters are a "he" that ends up confusing me, but it's not my fault as a dyslexic reader but that of the writer. I'm simply more likely to get caught up on the poor grammar because I can't take for granted what other readers do - the ability to instantly realize which "he" the writer is referring to, yet I bet sometimes they're wrong and don't even realize it at the time of reading.

It wasn't easy, maybe you can look at it when I post it on watt pad, that's the least you could do

Well, having stories which break grammar rules isn't against the rules over there. This said, don't expect a ton of readers or for that kind of story to win any of Wattpad's contests. I kind of find this amusing because there is sometimes a writer who asks if they can write without using capitals in their story and my imediate response is, "why would you want to do that" and "do you even understand what kind of message that conveys to the reader regarding the voice of the narrator?".

The fact this one didn't get the fact a "trailor" is a "preview" yet they're supposed to be seventeen? Sounds more like something a seven-year old would say. Which, I know that when we typically find under age users in the past they've been between the ages of ten to twelve - don't be surprised if the age starts getting lower what with kids getting tech which can connect to the net at a younger and younger age and the adults in their life not really thinking that fact through. Let me emphasize the not thinking it through part here as I'm not talking about parents who don't care what their kids are getting up to but more of they don't realize what is going on.

As the Father of one of the children they've gone after I'd have to agree that the way they handle critiquing needs work.

If I were a parent of one of these rule breaking children I'd be cracking down on the child for their blatant disregard of the site rules. The fact they capitalize the word father makes me wonder if it's really a parent of a child or the child themselves.

I try to teach and edit where authors need it.

I doubt they understand what this even means. As someone who does both fanfic and original fiction I wish to point out that even if you're indie publishing your work there are rules the publishing companies put forth which the writer needs to follow.

What they of course left out is that up till very recently, as I did double check, had MA explicit material that could be considered child porn o their own account. If this person is truly a parent of someone here not only would it explain said child's actions (though I don't recall dealing with them as given the outrage later this guy would have come in screaming bloody murder is so) but really makes me question their parenting skills if they think posting MA explicit material is ok as long as they do it.

I honestly doubt this one's a parent, but I guessed this even before you mentioned this Goody. I guessed as soon as I saw the word "father" capitalized. I'm reminded of the writer who tried telling me they weren't under aged despite the fact their OC was the very specific age of ten and three-quarters which is something I only see with younger kids unless of course the writer is talking about the character in the sense of how the child thinks of themselves in that manner and in no way was the writing that sophisticated. I mean, the canon characters who was obviously an older teen wouldn't have flirted with a bunch of girls the age of ten if that were the case.

But if they are a parent - egads on letting their child write MA content, or did they not even bother reading what their child wrote? Because the response I typically see when parents find out their child is writing MA content is to pull their child from the net and ban them from writing fanfic completely. The one exception was a thirteen year old who comes from a country with very lax laws regarding MA content who was more than willing to hold off on writing such content but was pleased as punch when I told them they didn't have to cater to those who wanted MA content with their stories and should instead write the stories they wanted to tell.

I overreact when I see children subjected to bullying or abuse.

Going with the idea that this isn't the parent - the kid doesn't know what bullying is.

If they are, they sound like the parent who will push for the schools to do away with first place rewards for students and have only participation ribbons because their child not placing in the top three constitutes bullying. These parents are in the minority but make life miserable for all other parents and the children who aren't their own.

I'm not a violent person but that doesn't apply to child molesters or child pornographers.

You can't claim you're a non violent person if you know you would go after even those mentioned. Their statement regarding a knife furthers this statement as pepper spray is the more reasonable option, but it would be extended to ones own bodily harm and those of any other person being attacked, not just children. Add to this - Gibbs from NCIS will tell you there are other reasons for carrying a knife on you that don't involve maiming a person as knives are very handy tools.

They decided to ignore my warning about 2 child porn stories, well all except for the one I dislike the most which I find funny. and now the lying begins. What they leave out is that in the tipline they were told:

They also ignored the fact their child was writing MA content. Add to this, I'm going to add simply labeling something as child porn doesn't make it so. I mean, having two kids have sex with each other with no detailed description is definitely not child porn, but this person reminds me of the people who filed false reports of pedophilia against any one who shipped two consenting adults together in their story because of the major age gap between the two characters. If it was something similar it is very doubtful this person is a parent of someone old enough to have an account.

I find it difficult to believe that my little rule breaking matters more than what I had to report. Makes no sense to me.

From the sounds of it it was also one of those cases of them claiming it was child porn and it wasn't or you didn't bother checking the stories to double check simply because they'd not bothered reviewing.

That part is concerning because the last time I heard something similar the guy who said it tried to stab his daughter to death(poor girl was left disfigured and paralized), and it wasn't even for the 'reason' he said he had his knife.

This. Just, this.

I refused to respond to them any further after that. I've had people take advantage of my kindness, and that's usually the last thing they get to do before I cut them out of my life completely. Honestly, Goody, the fact that they still keep at it proves they have learned nothing and still do not know how to act like an adult.

I agree with your decision, but have had to do it a few times in the past.

A real parent not only would've turned the flamethrower on full blast in a review for each story, but they would've also been making the rounds of not only us but all the writing forums on this site to get help in taking that crap down. They aren't doing any of that, so I don't believe it.

I'm reminded of the parent who caught their child reading M content which they weren't supposed to only to find out it was MA. The certainly did a lot more than this parent did.

Oh, I believe they're a parent, but the standard for being a parent isn't much. Paraphrased somewhere from r/childabuse, "B*tch the only qualification you have for being a parent is having unprotected sex."

Sadly, there are a few of those out there. If they are, they do deserve a call out for their parenting particularly when I see parents struggling with their autistic children being unfairly called out for not parenting their children properly when in reality they are. The fact the child is having an off day doesn't mean squat, but this idea of "nobody criticize me because it's my right to decide how I parent" - there are many right ways to parent and in that you shouldn't receive criticism, but in the very many wrong ways you should.

The previous MA story they had, of what I recall of it, had a self-insert, with the kid in that story stumbling into his bedroom while he was having sex with someone. Maybe, it was autobiographical in a way. It involved custody rights, and he's currently divorced. Does traumatizing a child this way fall under parental negligence or is it a common accident?

Ah. So they may very well be a parent, in which case if the other parent were to discover any of this - yes, it would fall under parental negligence. While there may not be anything this parent can be held criminially negligable for it can still be used in a custody rights case by the other parent as grounds for the child not to live with the parent who is going off on us. The other option is the child is both personas and dealing with the fact one of the parents is in someway neglectful and it is a cry for help.

Underage online harassment is not tolerated. And this isn't your first time doing it either. I warned you against harassment and cyber-bullying, especially against minors under the age of 18 is illegal but you are continuing to do this.

So, did anyone else notice this person doesn't realize that harassment and cyber-bullying is illegal regardless of whether the person being victimized is under the age of eighteen or not? They're also still working with the legal wording for laws involving cyber-bulling because they don't want the chance of someone not actually bullying or harassing getting caught up, but lawyers aren't going to want to take the latter cases on due to the fact they don't want to be the one setting the prevention of cyber-bullying back.

Interesting, you either have admin privileges to ffnet server or you are in direct contact with the admin. Either you're one of the admins posing under a sock account or have the hear of the admin. So then, which is it? ffnet admin or some random turd given admin privileges by the admins or in direct contact with admin? It's amazing how much information profiling leaks out or give away without people realizing.

What the...

I'm quite sure the admins wouldn't appreciate this accusation, but this person apparently doesn't realize that anybody given admin privileges is an admin so their is no or about it. However, you don't have to be an admin to call someone out for the rules let alone report them.

n any case, regarding your weak defensive argument, I would also make the case of saying that you don't have a leg to stand on yourself considering one of your own CU members Cha's Aegis has posted the same assert as what I posted to you above?

In any case, regarding your weak defensive argument, I would also make the case of saying that you don't have a leg to stand on yourself considering one of your own CU members Cha's Aegis has posted the same assert as what I posted to you above? Cha's Aegis: "You do realize what you're doing is true harassment and can be reported?" (#2,846)

Taking what Cha said out of context is taking what Cha says out of context. Even I knew they weren't referring to someone within the CU without looking at the context, so how did I know it was taken out of context? I remember a few times we've pointed out that attacking CU members and those like me who follow is in fact harassment and bullying, but unlike them nobody is threatening to report them to the local authorities for what they're doing. Filing false reports is also a legal matter.

Constructive criticism is about positive/negative feedback regarding a story or narrative. It's not about pointing out if someone broke the 'provisional' rules of this site.

The word provisional doesn't mean what they think it does. They think it means "not needing to be followed" when in reality it means "arranged or existing for the present, possibly to be changed later". The fact the rules haven't been changed for over ten years though says they're not likely to be changed, but even if they were you still while they are in place have to follow the rules.

I'm also going to argue that is a part of positive/negative feedback - calling someone out for following the rules or not. If the rules aren't there to ensure quality of writing they're there to ensure the site doesn't get sued. This said, I think they should look up the actual definition of a review because that proves what you're doing falls under it, but it falls into the site guidelines regarding how reviews are to be used. So, yeah, no.

If you think someone is breaking the rules, either pm the author your concerns or click the Report button and move on. Simple as that.

I used to do that. People are less likely to do something about a story which breaks the rules.

Have you counted the amount of reviews you have posted over the years leaving multiple reviews? It's a rather alarming amount of review spam that have "nothing to do with the story" and yes, even "insult the author" by publicly humiliating and embarrassing them by posting their responses segments in the "Worst Review Responses, Notes and Shout Outs. V2".

I'll start with the second part and point out that no author is publicly humiliated as there is a rule not to identify the writer by their name, but some of us will also edit out anything fandom relevant if we know it is a small fandom and that would in turn make it so they're easy to find. The only way they get publicly humiliated is if they manage to out themselves as the person, so that's on them.

As for the first argument, there are writers who feel embarrassed and humiliated simply because someone pointed out they misspelled the word "their" or "there". Not that I emphasized that this is a feeling and feelings have no basis in a court of law in regards to a harassment or cyber-bullying case. This also missed an important fact regarding harassment and slander cases. Harassment needs to be repeated against one individual for which the CU has rules to prevent it, but attempting to gauge in a civil conversation via PM doesn't constitute more than one incident. Slander on the other hand can only be brought forth if what is being said is untrue, but slander is an important element regarding cyber-bullying cases. Calling someone out publicly regarding their public behavior isn't bullying.

From what I can see, Cha's statement was said in a self-deprecating manner but I digress.

(...)

Again, it's taken out of context, but the deleted comments are shown as being deleted so the context is still there, yet to make such an assumption screams they went in with a bias, so no, just no.

No, you said that 'constructive feedback' is about pointing out if someone broke the rules. That is not a review, that is forewarning under the best of circumstances and at worst, passive aggressive threats depending on how you or any CU member word their responses in a certain way, by delivering an ultimatum "If you don't, we report!" diatribe which is why you should not be using the review section at all. In fact, I'm highly curious as to why the ffnet hasn't dealt with this as this partially breaking the ToS in itself.

I've started actually reading the ToS because they've started bringing that in and no, but the fact they had to use the word "partially" screams they know they're wrong about this. A person is never "partially" breaking the rules as that is a physical impossibility. You are either following them or you aren't.

They also sound like they're saying "constructive feedback" isn't a review which reviews ARE constructive feedback as that's the very definition. Warning someone the story breaks the rules does indeed fall under constructive feedback.

As for the threat part - "either you follow the rules or we report you for breaking them" isn't a threat, but a reality of life. There seems to be this idea that those reporting those breaking the rules are in fact the ones in the wrong when in reality it is always the person breaking the rule in the first place. This is no different from a bully claiming they are being bullied because nobody wants to play with them or be their friend because they're a bully.

You should be using the PM system to pass along your concerns as it will not single out or discriminate authors who might find it embarrassing to see a review like that or if they expected to see a constructive criticism regarding their story that actually talks about how they can improve.

In other words they're saying reviews should only be used to for praise simply because some of the writers receiving negative criticism feel embarrassed by getting critique. It doesn't matter that the way to treat people equally and not single them out is to review everybody the same and thus give everyone who deserves a negative critique a negative critique and not to avoid critique all together. Because here's the thing - their method isn't fair to the writers who are waiting for said critique but don't get it because someone decided it was okay to push this kind of policy regarding critique when it is not.

You incite violence with people either defending the author or bashing the author with your "constructive" ...forewarning which can lead to a toxic and destructive meltdown.

Last time I checked none of the reviews encouraged people to hunt down the writer and cause them physical harm, nor do any of the reviews egg others on to harass the writer. As for the reviews leading to a "toxic and destructive meltdown" if someone has a toxic and destructive meltdown simply because someone called them out for following the rules they have a serious physiological condition or there is something more serious going on like emotional abuse at home, school or the work place and said person needs to seek appropriate help and not blame others who aren't to blame.

And no, bawling ones head off because you didn't get your way is not a toxic and destructive meltdown. That is a tantrum.

Take your concerns through the PM system in private. That is what it is for.

PM is short for private message, yet the behavior in question - the breaking of site rules is in fact public. As such that is not what the PM system is for, yet this ignores what the review system is for - constructive feedback. That includes the rule breaking issue.

Darling, the provisional TOS cannot be legally enforced because 70-80% of the site visitors are composed of minors under the age of 18 who cannot enter an electronic contract of the TOS as they are under the legal age.

This one again? I'll say this again, but the TOS is legally enforcable, yet this same person is trying to say CU should be legally held to the TOS because they are "partially" breaking it - which I've pointed out the error on. The number of visitors under the age of eighteen is highly exaggerated, but they aren't correct because

The contract is completely legal if the parents gave the child permission to sign said contract, which as I've pointed out if a parent gave their child permission to use the site they in turn gave their child the permission to sign the contract which is something a person must do to sign up for an account.

The law is also in reference to contracts involving the exchange of money and anything else of monetary value, so even if the child doesn't have permission the contract is still legally binding.

If the child's parent didn't give permission they are not legally allowed to use the site and shouldn't be here in the first place, yet this fact doesn't negate the legality of the contract.

I'm reminded of a former Wattpad user who is blaming the site for the fact they will likely not be able to go to college because they effectively decided to use their Wattpad writing on all of their college applications when in fact they're the one who got their account deleted for a multitude of infractions regarding the site guidelines. They're finding out the hard way that these contracts we sign with sites are legally binding regardless of a person's age, yet we also need to remember that the end results are the fault of the rule breaker for choosing not to follow the rules and not that of the person warning and reporting.

Effectively this person wants us to teach kids they're not responsible for their own actions when they most definitely are.

You misunderstand me, I am talking about the multiple reviews of CU members posting the same thing, you included per story (3-5 members)...

Three is the limit, but there is a reason more than one is allowed. Specifically the fact one person may not believe one person or just two, but three is more likely not to be a mere coincidence. That said, they may be confusing non-member reviews for member reviews.

That is clearly an intimidation tactic for the purpose of brow-beating a green-horned author into submission.

I'm one in four whose been bullied, so please don't compare the intimidation I felt from those who bullied me with what the CU does. By their logic parents shouldn't hold punishments such as being grounded over their child's head and teachers shouldn't hold a failing grade and detention over the heads of the child for not doing what they're supposed to do. Having consequences for ones actions is a fact of life, but if someone is mature enough - not I didn't say old enough - to use this site then they are ready to deal with the consequences of their actions. Worse, this paints those who are thirteen to eighteen in a very infantile manner because apparently they are incapable of dealing with the consequences of their actions when in reality this is something they start dealing with as early as preschool.

It doesn't matter if you redact the names of the authors to protect their identities because google can search up reviews ad verbatim with a success rate of 98% after 5 words are quoted per sentence.

First, most of what is said is from PMS so people can't search them because they are private. What a person says publicly though is in fact public, but because it is publicly said the CU doesn't actually have to redact the name. As I've pointed out - slander is only when something is untrue. There are a multitude of reasons why names aren't allowed for the stuff the writer says publicly as well, but one of them comes down to the fact the writer may eventually decide to delete said comment as they want to distance themselves from their past follies and the CU wants to let them.

That is fine by me. As far I am concerned, you're a particularly scummy human being who preys on others, mainly minors with your passive aggressive stance on provisional guidelines that cannot be contractually binding.

The thing is I'm sure you guys have heard from this one before and they're still over estimating the number of minors on the site yet not giving those who are thirteen and older enough credit regarding their mental and emotional facilities. If someone is thirteen or older they have the ability to follow the rules, but also the ability to emotionally handle criticism. I'll take this a step farther and point out the fact not critiquing the younger writers in fandom has led to these young writers becoming writers for professionally published fanfic within industry thinking they can do anything without criticism and this is WITH the copyrighted material. This is the result of pretending thirteen to eighteen year olds have the emotional and mental capacity of a kindergartner when they're far more mature than this.

You won't hear from me again, but if CU's constant harassment continues, I can assure you that there will be legal consequences down the road.

There won't be, but good luck to anyone filing a charge against the CU as they will in fact be in legal trouble for filing a false report and wasting the time of the police. This also ends up burring the real complaints which need to be handled by the police, yet getting upset over critique honestly trivializes what those who HAVE been the victim of bullying and such have gone through. This is just like the youth who claim they suffer from depression simply because they sometimes feel sad - you don't actually know what it's like to have depression.

Just to give you an idea, there's already talk of one of your members in CU potentially being a pedophile after cursory glance of some posts that's been found.

I don't know what this one is about. Simply writing about the subject doesn't make you a pedophile but there are a wide range of reasons for touching about the subject not to mention the fact it can be written about which fall within the site rules and actual laws.

God, you can only say the same thing over and over again before you get sick of it. This one clearly doesn't understand constructive criticism. And, no, I don't threaten. Not in the reviews and not in PMs. If I say, "fine, then I'll just report it," that's just statement of fact, not a threat.

That's because anything which doesn't outright agree with them is wrong even though they've not once brought in any tangent evidence. I think this is the TOS person again who keeps trying to bring TOS in without actually understanding it as some of the arguements are the same as before. I'm not even a member of the CU yet I remember this one coming up a few times. There are some people who see reporting as a threat because it infringes upon their supposed right to do whatever they want, but there is no such right. Instead the rule breakers insist the button for repoting shouldn't be used.

Right, because did I just not say that when I offer suggestions and solutions, I'm trying to help them improve? And yes, getting negative feedback is embarassing. But if you can't handle it, don't post publicly online. Duh.

Well - we did have someone refer to offline as "real world" as if the internet wasn't a part of the real world. There is a bit of disconnect with some of these kids that the net IS a part of the real world. Since it is a part of the real world don't use it as some kind of private escape because there is nothing private about it.

Pretty sure we've discussed this somewhere else in this thread. Yemi? You're usually good at this kind of thing, but I'm pretty sure they're wrong about this. I mean, if this were true, Apple would be in some pretty deep s*** themselves right now.

Yup. That's why I actually suspect it's that person again as I recognize them using the exact same arguments including the fact the TOS doesn't constitute a legally binding contract because of minors despite the fact I've already debunked that and pointed out they honestly don't know how that works. I'd actually spent quite a bit of time looking into what they were talking about before replying and found nothing supporting their claim.

...oh, goody gumdrops I really hope they're trying to get the police in on this one.

I've said this before and this is why none of these threats regarding the police work on you members of the CU. You've done nothing wrong and the person getting the police involved is the one likely to face legal action.

From what I've Googled and asked my dad's lawyer, my not really distant relatives who are two sheriffs and a county judge, we don't break any law regarding cyberbulling or cyber-harassment, therefore what we do is perfectly legal. Also, the age fourteen makes any contract legally binding as you are considered mature enough to make a decision like writing online.

Yup, up and more up. The only legal contracts which aren't are ones such as purchasing ones own cellphone and such because the child has no way of earning money on their own and it's there to protect the child from being scammed.

Firstly, you're encroaching on this author's freedom of speech and right to literature expression.

On top of the fact this is a privately owned site there is a major misunderstanding that freedom of speech means absolutely no restrictions, yet if you actually look into it you can't slander, can't harass, can't cyber bully, can't shout fire in a busy theater when there is none, etc. Publishing companies, which is WHAT this site is are also allowed to restrict what is or isn't allowed to be published because the writer can go elsewhere, and plagiarism isn't writing or a form of literary expression. Let's add in the fact there are other things a writer can't do like throwing tantrums because everyone rejects their attempt of adopting a writing style of no end punctuation or capitalization because they think this makes them edgy as an attempt at literaryexpression. Don't talk about infringement when you've not had your work nixed by your government simply because you're writing LGBT content. What you're going through does not even begin to compare.

Wait, they want us to believe that an *actual* police force and a lawyer took this up. Either the police are just humoring them or they have nothing else to do, because my area has a very low crime rate and they are very strict on cases of accusing someone of cyberbulling. Even when the long tantrum happened I was told to take it up with the site, as they are the ones in charge.

Or they're lying. Most police either have something else to worry about or like your area has a low crime rate and see it as a waste of time and money. The officers also rely on outside agencies regarding cyber-bullying due to the fact it is something that can cross state lines and thus end up being a federal issue in scope. I'm talking about volunteers who look into these matters very seriously and wouldn't like their time wasted with something which isn't an actual case.

Yeup, an idiotic SJW. He trotted out the 'pedophile' accusation. And I agree that their glances were cursory as they've only looked for the bits that 'supported' their arguments and ignoring the full conversations.

I wonder if their accusation ties to when the subject came up and we pointed out that certain things weren't pedophila.

Having worked as a police dispatcher myself, I can attest even the smallest Mayberry police force is just too busy with real work to bother with online nonsense. The only time they're really interested is typically in missing person cases or if it happens to relate to different crime, not some whiner sniffling, "They're *sob* bullying *sob* me! Waaaaaaaaah!" When the reality is, we're not bullying anyone. It's stupid crap like this that diminishes genuine online cyber bullying to a joke. This moron can truly go f**k himself.

This, and another reason is they don't have the resources to look into online stuff, though they did take the one I mentioned regarding someone outside of fandom because she was constantly being harassed with death threats and threats of bodily harm.

Do you speak on behalf of Fanfiction dot net or any affiliating company (parent or child), 'honey'?

Sorry, but you don't have to speak on behalf of the site or an affiliating company to know that.

Secondly, almost every country has their own version of 'freedom of speech' with minor differences compared to the US First Amendment but for all intents and purposes, have the same core laws regarding the freedom of speech both in written and vocal format. Fanfiction wouldn't dare to go up against all 169 countries that have freedom of speech laws enforced or they would be in legal trouble...so I am not just talking about the United States of America, 'honey'.

Some of these countries actually allow censorship if what is said is deemed as a threat to public safety and moral. Be glad we live in the United States where we have the freedom to say what we want to say, but there isn't one country which supports the idea of absolute freedom of speech. Try shouting fire in a theater when there isn't one in any country out there and you'll find what I say is true when you have a civil lawsuit brought against you for the prank and watch the freedom of speech defense get thrown out of court very quickly.

Thirdly, you delivered an ultimatum against this author

Mom: Gives the ultimatum to behave or else they will ground their child. Child: Misbehaves because they think giving any kind of ultimatum is cruel and unusual punishment. Mom: Grounds the child because their ultimatum is a fact of life.

If you break the rules there are consequences one of which is people will report you, but seriously stop acting like the victim when you're the one who broke the rule in the first place.

Lastly, I am adding my own opinion but it's reflective of

Except they're not simply adding their own opinion due to the fact they're stating things as if they're fact when they're not, thus what they say is open to criticism and fact checking. The fact they don't like being called out for that - oh, wait - that's just like the rule breakers isn't it?

Let me be clear, it is not and will never be socially acceptable to gang up, intimidate, deliver ultimatums or harass people simply because they don't fall into the conformities of small technicalities found in their stories on this site with regards to the 'provisional' rules delivered by fanfiction dot net.

That's not what's happening. Actually - let's remove the word "ultimatum" from there because that's not part of what is socially unacceptable and is actually something which is socially acceptable. I am now imagining a court judge giving a dead beat father the ultimatum of paying child support or going to jail. Do they really want us to believe that isn't socially acceptable? There are so many issues with their arguement it isn't funny.

but it doesn't mean that you're being oppressed

This! Those who've never faced oppression once in their life honestly don't know what it's like.

All this talk of the ToS but you seem to be under the impression that you and your...buddies, think that they can report broken rules and try and get a story deleted because the ToS can be enforced.

Because the ToS is something that can be enforced. How else do they explain the stories the site admins remove among other things? It does happen, but I still remember the girl who thought she had permission to plagiarize Harry Potter from Rowling herself in a RTB losing her account.

The provisional ToS cannot be legally enforced because 70-80% of the site visitors are composed of minors under the age of 18 who cannot enter an electronic contract of the TOS as they are under the legal age. Therefore, the ToS cannot be contractually binding. That's why the ffnet site has called it "Guidelines" so in essence, there's no Terms of Service.

This one... how many times do I have to say what they're saying is not at all factual, but they can't say they're simply stating opinion when facts are involved.

I suppose Pornhub and other porn sites should get hit with lawsuits about providing porn to minors as well? Wow... the kid is saying that porn should be allowed because most of the users are minors? Does Perry listen to itself?

Apparently they're also unaware that yes, porn sites can get hit with lawsuits for providing porn to minors if they didn't utilize any preventative measures or used a tactic which intentionally lures minors in. Despite this they want us to honestly believe what they say regarding the TOS not being legally binding as fact. I don't think so.

I was a bit confused as to what was meant by "don't talk about us conducting an investigation" until Cha clarified. The line is more of, "we don't talk about any ongoing investigations", so yeah, there's another issue.

Reply 21h ago #1,485