“I know it’s sick and twisted”

Warning! This twank doesn’t come with brain bleach.

rubber-duckies-1234 has an interesting little story by the title of Daddy’s favourite girl, which features an incestuous/pedophilia/omgthisissogross mature relationship between Charlie and Bella. Our first instinct was to just run very far away, but others have been reporting this story to FFn for violation of the ToS.

But we can’t understand why they would. Like rubber-duckies says again and again:

I put up a warning that there was going to be incest. So please don’t review or if you don’t like it, or if your disgusted by it, I mean why review a story and tell me it’s sick. I know it’s sick and twisted but everyone has different opinion and there is a plot for this story.

Rated M for mature themes and incest.

You’ve all been warned! We don’t know about you, but whenever we see something offensive, disgusting,  repulsive, immoral, scary, etc and so on, we just ignore it. That’s why whenever we see suspicious men on playgrounds with their hands in their pants, we walk the other way instead of causing a scene, amirite?

A/N: No rude reviews please and vote on my poll!

The readers have been warned that the story is sick, twisted, and incestuous, and instructed to only leave nice reviews.

ENTER: THE RUDE REVIEWS!

Okay everyone, don’t be mad because I know that I promise there won’t be another AN. I have some bad news and good news.

Bad news:

People have been reporting this story saying it’s sick and disgusting. I put up a warning that there was going to be incest. So please don’t review or if you don’t like it, or if your disgusted by it, I mean why review a story and tell me it’s sick. I know it’s sick and twisted but everyone has different opinion. I don’t know if this story is going to be deleted or not.

And remember it is Fanfiction “Unleash you imagination.” That is the quote for the FF. Just saying.

She seems so familiar with Fanfiction.net’s slogan. We wish they’d add to that “…if you’ve read the ToS.” (Which she obviously hasn’t)

She also lists in her last chapter every (good) reviewer, story alerter, and story favorite’er, because that’s something everyone wants to be closely associated with.

Also an Evil Twin wank from her FFn profile, just because it made us lawl:

Sorry for those of you that gotten hate messages from me, I lent my brother my laptop and forgot to sign out of FF because I just made an account and my brother went on, so I am so sorry for the trouble I caused.

.

Combative. Rude. Arrogant. Did I miss anything?

Nonnie blesses our inbox with something truly twank worthy.

We’re not going to go into the specifics of what a good review is, but why would we, when mac214 has already done the homework for us? In her blog entry titled, The Lost Art of Constructive Criticism, mac teaches us what an acceptable review is. AND HER BLOG IS WEARING OUR DRESS, BUT ASIDE FROM THAT… According to her,

The art of constructive criticism seems to be lost on those in the fandom who consider themselves qualified enough to leave it. Most of the time it seems designed to make the writer feel like shit instead of genuinely helping them improve their writing.

This would seem to imply that not only is everyone not qualified enough to constructively criticize a Twilight Fanfiction, but also that most negative reviews (which are likely a generous 5% of all FFn reviews) are only being left to bring the author down.

re·view (r-vy)

v. re·viewed, re·view·ing, re·views

v.tr. 

1. To look over, study, or examine again.

2. To consider retrospectively; look back on.

3. To examine with an eye to criticism or correction: reviewed the research findings.

4. To write or give a critical report on (a new work or performance, for example).

5. Law To reexamine (an action or determination) judicially, especially in a higher court, in order to correct possible errors.

6. To subject to a formal inspection, especially a military inspection.

7. Given for the sole purpose of aiding the subject of said criticism to improve.

One could argue she was only referring to constructive criticism and not reviews as a whole. It’s not like she picked a negative review, threw it up on her blog, made an example out of a reader who was just leaving an honest and not at all hostile opinion, and then took it upon herself to correct them.

Or maybe she did.

Last night someone complained about the accent in Coming Through the Rye in a way that was less than constructive:

I’m sure you really won’t care about this review but I can’t believe you have someone Scottish helping with this dialect. You’re mixing different Scottish dialects throughout, also the only people who sound that broad are farmers and people over 70, and the glossary is hit or miss too. For a start “teucher” is absolutely not a highland term, it refers to people from NE Scotland. Black Pudding? NOTHING like a sausage, the texture/taste is so different that calling it this is ridiculous. As a Scot it pains me to see this as a representation of Scotland.

Combative. Rude. Arrogant. Did I miss anything?  I thanked the reviewer for her opinion, but shockingly this particular reviewer HAD to assure me of her superiority and correctness, which led to me letting out a tiny bit of snark.  I probably would have reined it in a bit if she’d just been insulting me (I’m certainly no expert at Scottish slang and accents), but she’s also insulting Claire, my prereader who lives in Glencoe, Scotland – and what kind of idiot implies I wouldn’t know a sausage if it bit me in the ass?  Not to mention, if you’re going to dispute the glossary definitions, be sure googling the term “teuchter” doesn’t immediately take you to page after page that defines it as a word referring to people in the Highlands. Considering Claire’s people refer to themselves as “teuchtery”… well, I don’t think the reviewer in question could have outed herself as a true troll and absolute moron any more if she tried.

How might this reviewer have transmitted her viewpoint without coming off as a complete douchebag?

Mac then proceeds to reconstruct (we can’t make this up) what she felt the review should have been. Anyone got a facepalm gif handy?

“I like that you’re writing a Scottish Edward.  I live in Scotland, though, and your portrayal of the accent doesn’t seem quite right.  To my ear, the accent appears too heavy and the slang is wrong for a person of that age group.  Perhaps you might add an additional Scottish person to join your prereading team to offer a second opinion – I would be happy to step in if you’re interested.  You may also want to consider rewording your description of blood pudding.  It doesn’t seem very sausage-like to me – it’s not quite as firm and meaty. Thanks for putting so much effort into your fic!” It gets the point across, offers solutions, and doesn’t imply the reviewer is schmuck.

We’d point out that instead of looking like a schmuck, now it just looks like the reader has her tongue glued to your anus, just the way you like, but we won’t. You’d probably make an example out of us too.

Twank Roundup:

Blog Post: Contests are unfair and only the popular girls win (Even though she only made the blog post to announce she’s placed in one)

Blog Post: Teaching the world about the evils of homophones (You can leave links to any homophone errors present in her fics in the comments… we don’t read…)

Blog Post: Tax deductions for fic research (Just no)

Blog Post: Your BDSM fic is boring and only popular because it’s trendy (Not that we disagree, but her fic list isn’t exactly screaming INTRIGUE)

Blog Post: Just everything.

Profile Page: “Thinking about leaving negative feedback? Consider whether your review is constructive or abusive. My policy is to ban anyone who leaves abusive criticism and make fun of them publicly for being a douchebag.” (Should we remind you what she considers “abusive”?)

We didn’t look at her Twitter, but we ‘magine it goes something like:

*SELF-IMPORTANCE* *SELF-IMPORTANCE* *SELF-IMPORTANCE*

.

Chickens of a Feather

Does it come as a huge surprise that our first (blog-worthy) submitted twank hails from the ever-masturbatory feathersmmmm? Not to us, it doesn’t.

For the sake of hilarity, let’s rewind back to a simpler time in fandom. The entire TwiFic blog phenomenon was just being born, and with that came Twigasm, which for those of you who may be unfamiliar, was/is an adult-catered Twilight FanFiction podcast. Feathers, who was at the time authoring the RPF love story I Love L.A. (which has since been pulled for publishing and reworked into the masterpiece we know today as The Unidentified Personalities Redhead) was one of the authors involved.

Since Omnific (a controversial, Twilighted.net business that takes mediocre, yet popular fanfictions and edits them for the purpose of monopolizing off their guise of original fiction) sprinkled Feathers with the ill-gotten gains of publishdom, the author has become widely known for a long string of incredibly verbose and wanktastic author notes. In fact, like any good twankhard, she seems to love the attention (we know you’re reading, chicken), often transparently making the A/Ns as long as she possibly can, while passive aggressively instigating her critics.

Her most recent A/N defends her use of the endearment “chickens” (duh, it means she fucking loves you, you flock of sanctimonious morons). It also promotes her upcoming sequel to The Unidentified Talent Redhead, which she just knows you’ll buy, because you weren’t bored by the complete lack of characterization in the first one entirely fulfilled by her first, admit it.

But this isn’t where the real twank comes in. We were notified of the activity on her Twitter account this evening, and we had to admit. We were quite amused. While it’s against our rules to post screenshots of private Twitter accounts, we couldn’t resist a little creative re-enactment.

Isn’t it funny when people take things too seriously?

Like whenever mediocre fanfiction authors write a self-insert story about boning Robert Pattinson, and then proceed to dress it up as actual literature once it gains a little steam in the community?

Yes.

No matter what I do or how I explain myself, some people aren’t going to like me.

True, but it probably helps if we’re not being preached at/told to go fuck ourselves every single A/N.

Is it ever okay for authors to bash another author’s story?

Oh, this is going to get good. Translation: Someone who actually holds some weight in this community was a big fat meanie pants.

I love concrit. I just think it should only be given by critics whose ultimate goal in giving it is to see the author excel.

I’ll remember that next time I go to see an M. Night Shyamalan movie.

On public vs private criticism: If you sling nasty shit, then own up to it, slather your dildos in it, wear it on your dumb faces.

It’s okay to sling shit in public so long as you wear the feces as warpaint. We’re with you.

I have negative opinions on stories, but I never share them in public.

Wait…. what?

We’re too unmotivated to go through your timeline and prove you wrong. (And we would.)

Feel free to flame me.

Don’t worry, we will.

I’m not judging anyone.

No, you’d never do that. You’re too busy “staying classy” and using your very public A/Ns as a tool to attack and incite your critics.

.