According to the stable’s Web site, it specializes in Equine Facilitated Learning, a system that teaches “non-verbal leadership and interpersonal communication skills through non-predatory horse-inspired wisdom.”
But why the praying? The wall is of course just an enormous random number generator. But couldn’t the agnostic among us say that that is also exactly what, from a certain point of view, God is? Is the wall a merciful wall? Is the wall an awesome wall? Is the wall a vengeful wall?
shlevy asked: Unrelated to the core question, but IMO TNC is, like, the platonic form of "produced as a part of fannish culture"
FWIW, the deciding factor seems to be the social context of production moreso than anything about the content, to judge from the TOS FAQ:
Some of these do fall within our mission. In particular, original fiction that is part of an Open Doors project is allowed, as are types of original fiction and quasi-original fiction produced within a fandom context. Examples include such things as anthropomorfic, original fiction that is produced as part of a fandom challenge, exchange, or charity event, and genres such as Original Slash, Original BL, and Regency romances produced in Jane Austen fandom.
Then again, if “Original Slash” is anything like what it sounds like, the boundary here is pretty murky and I’m glad it’s not my job to police it
Just a heads up, AO3 deleted one of my original works because someone reported it for “not being fanwork” despite original work being a “fandom” with over 35k fics.
“Under Section IV. of the Terms of Service, which you agreed to when opening your account, prompt requests, prompt lists, squee posts, notices about meetups, non-fanwork fiction or nonfiction, fic searches, rec lists, letters to other users, reactions to episodes, blog or Tumblr-appropriate posts, and other ephemeral content (i.e. content meant to be temporary), are not allowed to be uploaded on the Archive of Our Own.”
If you have multiple original works on AO3, you very well could be permanently suspended for violating the terms of service.
Be careful.
I have no fucking clue, especially since they hired people to wrangle the tags, meaning that they’re well aware that original work is an option
IS this true? D: AO3 what the heck?
Here’s the email I got, so yeah, it is true
Can everyone reblog this? AO3 has been dealing with a lot of abuse in their invite system, and if they’re cracking down on other areas like original works, this could affect a lot of writers.
Wth OTW? D:
what???
gdi does this mean i have to find somewhere else to put my demon porn
@ everyone else in this thread, i direct you to the TOS FAQ:
Can I archive original fiction?
Yes and no. Although some users may want a place for all their
creative work, our current vision of the Archive is of a place dedicated
to fanworks in particular. The Archive was designed to serve the mission of the Organization for Transformative Works (OTW),
which was “established by fans to serve the interests of fans by
providing access to and preserving the history of fanworks and fan
culture in its myriad forms.”
Because our long-term plans include hosting fanworks of all kinds,
not just fan fiction, we concluded that it was better to draw a line
between fanworks and non-fanworks and only host the former, in order to
avoid becoming a general repository for all sorts of creative works. In
addition, we will enforce the noncommercialization policy strictly,
including a ban on works posted to promote the sale of the author’s
other works, even if those are not hosted on the site.
However, there are a number of varieties of works produced by fans
that do not fit comfortably into a narrow definition of fanfiction,
fanart, vids, or other types of fanworks. Some of these do fall within
our mission. In particular, original fiction that is part of an Open
Doors project is allowed, as are types of original fiction and
quasi-original fiction produced within a fandom context. Examples
include such things as anthropomorfic, original fiction that is produced
as part of a fandom challenge, exchange, or charity event, and genres
such as Original Slash, Original BL, and Regency romances produced in
Jane Austen fandom.
At such time as we are able to host art and vids, we anticipate
similar policies will apply to those mediums: Art and vids will be
considered fannish even in cases where they do not directly depict
characters and elements from or use footage from an existing media
source if they were created in a fandom context for a fandom audience.
This may include such things as fanart that is intended to be for a
particular canon but which does not contain readily identifiable canon
characters or elements, art and vids produced as part of a fandom
challenge, exchange, or charity event, illustrations of fanfiction, and
vids that comment on a particular canon without using any clips from it
(e.g., fan-produced videos set in a particular universe).
We presume that, by posting the work to the Archive, the creator
is making a statement that they believe it’s a fanwork. As such, unless
the work doesn’t meet some other criterion, it will be allowed to
remain.
Reblogging this because I have three original works hosted on AO3, with quite a few comments and stuff over there, and I wouldn’t want to see them taken down even if I could put them up somewhere else. (I can’t imagine anyone else wants this either?)
Also, just in case, I should get an offline snapshot of exactly what these stories look like currently on AO3, including the comments. (I have one of TNC, but I don’t think it has the comments)
In short: If an original work is produced as part of fannish culture (a declaration made by the user by posting the work), it’s allowed on AO3. No works are being removed simply for being original works.
Original Work is a canonical fandom on AO3 because that’s the best “fandom” description for some permitted works. Take a look at the Original Work tag page for an idea of how it fits in the Archive, including its synonyms.
I confess I don’t entirely understand the first sentence here. If this is all it takes: I hereby declare that Floornight, The Northern Caves, and Almost Nowhere were/are produced as part of fannish culture. I’ll also add a line saying that to my AO3 user page.
I don’t think you (or most other people) have anything to worry about, because it appears that OP is a bit of a fibber and had ‘works’ removed that were essentially blog posts and status updates.
Oh, that’s a relief. Thanks.
Also, I think I misread the “declaration” sentence – they seem to be saying that no original work will ever be taken down, because it is “produced as a part of fannish culture” by virtue of being on AO3? If so, that would make sense as a way of tactfully calling BS on the original claim, as commenters suggest in that FFA thread. But if so, it would be nice to have that clearly stated in the TOS. (And if not, I still don’t know what they mean.)
Just a heads up, AO3 deleted one of my original works because someone reported it for “not being fanwork” despite original work being a “fandom” with over 35k fics.
“Under Section IV. of the Terms of Service, which you agreed to when opening your account, prompt requests, prompt lists, squee posts, notices about meetups, non-fanwork fiction or nonfiction, fic searches, rec lists, letters to other users, reactions to episodes, blog or Tumblr-appropriate posts, and other ephemeral content (i.e. content meant to be temporary), are not allowed to be uploaded on the Archive of Our Own.”
If you have multiple original works on AO3, you very well could be permanently suspended for violating the terms of service.
Be careful.
I have no fucking clue, especially since they hired people to wrangle the tags, meaning that they’re well aware that original work is an option
IS this true? D: AO3 what the heck?
Here’s the email I got, so yeah, it is true
Can everyone reblog this? AO3 has been dealing with a lot of abuse in their invite system, and if they’re cracking down on other areas like original works, this could affect a lot of writers.
Wth OTW? D:
what???
gdi does this mean i have to find somewhere else to put my demon porn
@ everyone else in this thread, i direct you to the TOS FAQ:
Can I archive original fiction?
Yes and no. Although some users may want a place for all their
creative work, our current vision of the Archive is of a place dedicated
to fanworks in particular. The Archive was designed to serve the mission of the Organization for Transformative Works (OTW),
which was “established by fans to serve the interests of fans by
providing access to and preserving the history of fanworks and fan
culture in its myriad forms.”
Because our long-term plans include hosting fanworks of all kinds,
not just fan fiction, we concluded that it was better to draw a line
between fanworks and non-fanworks and only host the former, in order to
avoid becoming a general repository for all sorts of creative works. In
addition, we will enforce the noncommercialization policy strictly,
including a ban on works posted to promote the sale of the author’s
other works, even if those are not hosted on the site.
However, there are a number of varieties of works produced by fans
that do not fit comfortably into a narrow definition of fanfiction,
fanart, vids, or other types of fanworks. Some of these do fall within
our mission. In particular, original fiction that is part of an Open
Doors project is allowed, as are types of original fiction and
quasi-original fiction produced within a fandom context. Examples
include such things as anthropomorfic, original fiction that is produced
as part of a fandom challenge, exchange, or charity event, and genres
such as Original Slash, Original BL, and Regency romances produced in
Jane Austen fandom.
At such time as we are able to host art and vids, we anticipate
similar policies will apply to those mediums: Art and vids will be
considered fannish even in cases where they do not directly depict
characters and elements from or use footage from an existing media
source if they were created in a fandom context for a fandom audience.
This may include such things as fanart that is intended to be for a
particular canon but which does not contain readily identifiable canon
characters or elements, art and vids produced as part of a fandom
challenge, exchange, or charity event, illustrations of fanfiction, and
vids that comment on a particular canon without using any clips from it
(e.g., fan-produced videos set in a particular universe).
We presume that, by posting the work to the Archive, the creator
is making a statement that they believe it’s a fanwork. As such, unless
the work doesn’t meet some other criterion, it will be allowed to
remain.
Reblogging this because I have three original works hosted on AO3, with quite a few comments and stuff over there, and I wouldn’t want to see them taken down even if I could put them up somewhere else. (I can’t imagine anyone else wants this either?)
Also, just in case, I should get an offline snapshot of exactly what these stories look like currently on AO3, including the comments. (I have one of TNC, but I don’t think it has the comments)
In short: If an original work is produced as part of fannish culture (a declaration made by the user by posting the work), it’s allowed on AO3. No works are being removed simply for being original works.
Original Work is a canonical fandom on AO3 because that’s the best “fandom” description for some permitted works. Take a look at the Original Work tag page for an idea of how it fits in the Archive, including its synonyms.
I confess I don’t entirely understand the first sentence here. If this is all it takes: I hereby declare that Floornight, The Northern Caves, and Almost Nowhere were/are produced as part of fannish culture. I’ll also add a line saying that to my AO3 user page.
Seems to me like many symptoms of physical illnesses don’t pass the “gun-to-the-head” test, either. More precisely, the test divides the symptoms of each physical illness into total incapacities (e.g. you can’t stop a fatal illness from killing you) and mere alterations of capacity (e.g. doing stuff is hard when you have the flu), and deems the latter “preferences” and the former “budget constraints.”
This might well be a useful division for some purpose, but it is an unfamiliar one, and does not correspond to how we normally think about the severity (or voluntariness) of illnesses.
On the other side of things, plenty of mental illnesses pass the test if the action is purely internal and we trust the person’s self-report as to whether it works. (E.g. telling a depressed person “enjoy the next minute of your life, or I’ll shoot!” – even if we abstract away from the the unpleasantness of the envisioned situation.) We’re not used to thinking of purely internal behavior in these economic modeling terms, which makes this feel off-limits somehow. Thus, we ignore it, and end up with a model of mental illness that treats mental states as non-observable (which is presumably not what we want, on reflection).
I ought to read the paper before letting my opinions flap in the breeze, but since you brought this up – I do think that the boundary is a lot fuzzier than we think, and the idea that there’s this hard distinction depends on the resilience/fungibility of the brain, the fact that we have a really bad model of brain function, and the fact that our concepts of “performing a task” are varied and arbitrary.
Seems to me like many symptoms of physical illnesses don’t pass the “gun-to-the-head” test, either. More precisely, the test divides the symptoms of each physical illness into total incapacities (e.g. you can’t stop a fatal illness from killing you) and mere alterations of capacity (e.g. doing stuff is hard when you have the flu), and deems the latter “preferences” and the former “budget constraints.”
This might well be a useful division for some purpose, but it is an unfamiliar one, and does not correspond to how we normally think about the severity (or voluntariness) of illnesses.
On the other side of things, plenty of mental illnesses pass the test if the action is purely internal and we trust the person’s self-report as to whether it works. (E.g. telling a depressed person “enjoy the next minute of your life, or I’ll shoot!” – even if we abstract away from the the unpleasantness of the envisioned situation.) We’re not used to thinking of purely internal behavior in these economic modeling terms, which makes this feel off-limits somehow. Thus, we ignore it, and end up with a model of mental illness that treats mental states as non-observable (which is presumably not what we want, on reflection).
