Over in one of the feedback threads, TOC posted:

Okaaaay...

First of all, Ann, I'm somewhat dubious of where you find the evidence for that first charge you make. I am NOT aware that the PG13 policy on the Archive has shifted in recent years. AS EIC, I've certainly made no recent changes in how I determine where the line lies - I'm working to the same set of rules I was handed when I took on the job. Just as I've always done.

In fact, I find your accusation quite ironic. I remember a few months after I became EIC I was accused by two FoLCs on Zoomway's forum of shifting the line way too far in the liberal direction. Since my taking over the job, apparently, the Archive had become the land of Sodom and Gommora overnight.

I hadn't made any shift then, either.

In fact, it's extremely rare that the subject of PG13 comes up for me as EIC of the Archive. I perhaps get an email on the subject from an author or GE once in a blue moon. Otherwise, I rely on the GEs to keep to the line as laid out in the guidelines posted on the Archive and I'm not aware that any of them have magically and abruptly shifted their opinions on where the line lies either.

The Archive may well have strict standards when compared to other fandoms out there. I wouldn't dispute that. However, that has always been the case. The history of FoLCdom has shaped those rules and they apply today as they always have done. Back in the day, it was FoLCs themselves who were strict about the subject. Hoo boy, were they strict. Way, way too strict in my own, personal, opinion. Then, it was brought up almost on a daily basis - mostly by those whose definition of nfic was way tighter than anything currently applying. Then you couldn't even mention the word nfic without provoking a fight, let alone post anything that might cross the line. And authors who actually wrote nfic were considered sadly misguided sinners who needed to be brought back into the light.

I do believe it IS true to say that there has been a recent shift in FoLCdom on PG13. But it lies here on these mbs, not on the Archive, Ann. The criteria for PG13 has always been the same on the ms and the Archive. But within the last year or two, things have become much looser here on the mbs as we've had a large influx of new members who aren't so hung up on the subject as in the past and who are much looser about where the line lies.

It may be that this growing gap in perception between the two as to where the PG13 line lies is why you think there's been a shift in Archive policy. It should be noted, however, that until and unless the admins of this forum decide to change the rules, the guidelines and rules for PG13 as listed on the Archive are also the rules and guidelines which govern this forum.

<sigh> I consider that first remark to be a personal flame, Ann. You may have cited the Archive, but as it's non-sentient it can't possibly be juvenile. It holds therefore that what you actually mean is the EIC is juvenile.

I hardly think that I can be considered a prude or obsessively dedicated to eradicating all things sex-related like some rabid Mary Whitehouse. Not with the amount of nfic I've posted on the fandom. Actually, on a personal level, I'm probably much more liberal on the topic than I have to be in my persona as Archive EIC. Believe me, I don't take any great pleasure from telling an author they have to delete text and as an author who has had to convert nfic stories to PG13 myself I know how difficult it can be to do. When it becomes necessary, I believe I'm more than fair and keen to help the author delete as little as possible and I don't think Carol can complain otherwise.

But, as EIC it's my responsibility to apply the current rules. You may find the line as it currently stands ridiculous, but I can assure you that many others will complain that it is way too liberal. As EIC, I have the difficult task of charting a course that will, hopefully, satisfy both camps, most of the time. This I do to the best of my ability and I deeply resent being called juvenile for doing it.

As someone more at the sharp end of conflicting opinion on the subject than most, trust me when I say that I'm perfectly aware that the line between PG13 and nfic is often arbitrary. It is impossible to sit down and say firmly and absolutely - as far as here and no further. Any guidelines posted on the Archive can only BE guidelines, nothing more than that.

As such, it is simply a fact of life that where the line definitively lies will come down in the end to the judgement of the EIC currently in charge of the Archive. I am absolutely sure that, although generally in tune, the previous EIC, Kathy, would not have made the same rulings I have. She'd have let things in that I wouldn't and vice versa. And I'm equally sure that the EIC to come after me will not see the line exactly where I do either. Until we get a definitive definition, that's just going to be how it works, unfortunately. Being human, we have to work it out as best we can and that's about all anyone can reasonably expect of us. It's certainly true to say that on the odd occasion that it comes up as an issue it's definitely by far the most difficult part of being an EIC.

Believe me, over the years a purely definitive line would have made my life a heck of a lot easier. In fact, if it wasn't for the fact that we have a separate nfic archive run by Annette, I'd be more than happy to just lump everything into the Archive and just make sure it's properly and clearly listed as nfic or not.

However, so long as I AM the EIC of the Archive, the rules that have always applied for PG13 will continue to apply. The fact that the Archive doesn't accept nfic is clearly stated in our submission rules. Like any organisation or forum, we expect them to be adhered to when a story is submitted.

With regard to the specifics of this issue, I do not believe that there can be much argument that two characters discussing the act of masturbation currently lies firmly in the land of nfic, according to the guidelines listed on the Archive. No matter how much some members of this forum may disagree, this one isn't even close to being on the border, I'm afraid. Unless the guidelines/rules change, it will always be a taboo topic.

Having said that, it needs to be remembered that the current guidelines date back to the inception of the Archive. That's a lot of years now and, of course, what you can see and hear on TV now is a lot more liberal than it was then.

I guess it comes down to whether you believe the guidelines should be based on current TV or whether it should be based on what would have been acceptable on LNC itself. FoLCs have always held strong views on both points - much of the reasoning for the guidelines came from the fact that a large majority of FoLCs believed at the time that the Superman myth was so family orientated and so morally pure that anything over PG13 would sully it.

Clearly, it's certainly true to say that FoLCdom has become much more liberal in the last ten years than it previously was. Whether that and a changing world are enough reasons to change something that, on the whole, has worked fairly well for the fandom, is perhaps a subject for debate. But so long as the current guidelines are in force then I will, as the current EIC, continue to apply them as I'm obliged to do.

If you are in any doubt about where the line lies, I'm more than happy to advise you. Just drop me an email.


LabRat

Okay, small correction to my previous post:

Ann wrote:

I re-read Carol's author's note:

and I've realised that the way that it's worded seems to have muddied the waters on the issue, because it's become clear that it was the basis for your comment, Ann. Which isn't that surprising as it does clearly imply that there's been a shift of policy. But that's only because it is half my email comment, and not the whole of it.

To clarify then. I did say in my email to Carol that if Becky presented her story with that text to me now I'd consider it nfic, just like the text in Carol's story - the two are fairly similar as Carol pointed out. But I added that I would have no doubt considered it nfic at the time it was uploaded, too, if I'd realised it was there.

The omission of that second point in Carol's note - which was unintentional I have absolutely no doubt - has clearly given the impression that my opinion on Becky's text has shifted between the story being uploaded and now, whereas, in actuality, nothing is further from the truth. My opinion would have been the same then and now.


LabRat

Labrat

In comment to all this I have to say I've read stories classied as PG13 that I would consider Nfic. I've also read stories classified as Nfic that I couldn't figure out why they received that classification. Would I call anyone a name or get in a furor over this. NO. Labrat and all the other editors here have a hard job. They do their best and we should all be thankful for the job they do.

So Labrat:

T H A N K Y O U.

I didn't mean to start some big debate and I certainly didn't mean to misrepresent you, Labby, but you know that. I shouldn't have said anything about it and just apologized for the delay in posting *sigh*. I hate being the cause of things remotely controversial - unintentionally or otherwise.

And actually, the thought that I worded that poorly did occur to me but then kids and such took over and I forgot about it.

If DS will cooperate long enough, I'll go fix it but I'm not hopeful at the moment .

I didn't mean to imply that Labby would have allowed Becky's [and therefore, mine] then but not either one now. And Labby - were you even EIC then? I think Kathy still was at that point, but that's not the point. The standards haven't changed, but for some reason IADT made it through when it shouldn't have. Because of that precedent, Labby would allow mine today.

All that said, I think the convo I cut did add to the development of their relationship but it's not worth making nfic over as it would be the only thing that made it nfic. In all honesty, if I hadn't reread IADT, it probably never would have been written. And IMO, IADT was much more... explicit [and I hesitate to use that term because while obvious what Becky was talking about, the fact that it should have been in nfic never occurred to me and I'm pretty nfic sensitive] than the conversation, but that's okay. Rules are rules and I gladly abide by them. I was genuinely curious when I asked Labby why this wouldn't be allowed but IADT had been and she said, IHO, it shouldn't have been allowed 7 years ago. That explains it to me just fine and the fact she would allow it based on precedent not rules made me sufficiently uncomfortable with posting it as PG13 and won't post it at all. It's really not a big deal - I made it into more of one in my own mind than it should have been and I didn't mean to make it into one here.

I think I was going to say something else but DS is crying and the phone has rung 4 times and DD6 apologized for 'hating' me and I chatted with her for a few minutes and I don't remember what it was, so my headache and I are going to go take some medicine and hope that I didn't stir things up even more here.

Carol [who would also like to declare that Labby rocks and will try to get her something finished enough for the archive soon because this behemouth will be a while]

The one thing I'm going to add to LabRat's absolutely excellent post on Archive policy and her role as EIC is to emphasise that, as EIC, she does have to rely on her team of General Editors.

As a former general editor, who served in that capacity for around six or seven years, I can tell you that we have to exercise a lot of judgement when editing stories. There is no definitive line; there is precedent and there is opinion. When editing a story, I would have to use my judgement, try to compare with stories already out there and also negotiate with the author - I say 'negotiate' because it's not the GE's job to change a fic. The GE makes suggestions. The author can agree or disagree, unless it's a ratings issue, in which case the GE says 'I don't think that's PG13', and we're left trying to find a compromise because, ultimately, we want the author to be happy that their story is on the Archive.

In the case of inability to agree, GEs will refer to the EIC for a ruling - but obviously we try to avoid doing that, otherwise the poor EIC will be making rulings all the time and what's the point in having a GE who's incapable of making an independent judgement? That means that, even under the same EIC, it's possible to have different standards applied to stories. That can't be helped. When Becky's story was uploaded, it's quite possible that the EIC of the day never even saw it. With anything between 10 and 30 stories out for editing at any one time - and some of them very long - there's no way the EIC can read everything.

There are checks and balances; if something gets through that clearly shouldn't and the EIC ends up having to make a ruling (which was very rare in my experience over the years I was a GE), it's usual that the EIC will email all GEs afterwards to say 'it's now Archive policy that the following is not acceptable'. That happened with the use of one particular four-letter word beginning with S - considered more heinous in the US than the UK, apparently.

Of course it's an imperfect system, but it's one which relies on the generosity, hard work and diligence of a number of people who volunteer their time to help writers to make their stories as presentable as possible and provide an Archive which is entertaining and also as accessible as possible to as many people of all ages as possible. I'm just sorry that anyone feels it necessary to attack and slander people who work very hard to ensure that FoLCs have great new fic to read each week.


Wendy

I would also like to throw in my two cents as an author, but first, I want to thank Labrat and the other GEs who work so hard to keep the Archive running. I know it can't be easy to coordinate so many stories, of varying lengths, topics and quality. You rock! And furthermore, I think the GEs put a lot of work into deciding what the rating should be on a story.

I write both nfic and gfic for this fandom, and I consider my audience when I am writing my stories. I know how far I can go with the gfic before it becomes inappropriate for the gfic side -- my litmus test is generally "can I read this on my work computer?" (also known as "would I have a stroke if my boss saw me reading this?) Honestly, when I set out to write a story, I think about the topic of the story and THEN decide which way to take it. Anything that is going to have a strong focus on sex, I would rather write as nfic and take my creative liberties up against a tree or something.

For example, "Sexy Little Things" had no sex, but it was about Clark buying Lois the black teddy, and there was enough innuendo and sensuality that I thought it was best posted in the nfic folder. In addition, I have been asked to write a gfic version of "Inside Out," but because I feel that the sex is such an intregal part of the plot -- especially the conference-room scene that ends up having deep ramifications for their relationship -- if I take it out, the story has lost its integrity.

However, "Rain" is on the regular Archive -- with a PG-13 rating. I rated it that way because of the subject matter, and my GE agreed. If I had added any form of sex to it, I would have posted it on the nfic side. It's as simple as that.

My point being that I think the stories on the regular Archive are the way they are because the authors choose to write them to that audience. They know what lines they can cross -- hence why there are several stories that have both a gfic and an nfic version. The best authors know exactly how far they can take it without fear of reprisal.

I figure if people want to read stories with actual sex scenes in them, they can read them on the nfic archive -- which is password protected. I have no problem with nfic (clearly), but I can see how it would be pretty unfair to blindside people with it on the regular archive -- with no password or warning. I think it's a specialized form of fic. PG-13, on the other hand, is stepping up to the line, taking a good look, but not crossing the threshold, and I think that is the right "tone" for the general archive. After all, L&C was a show that had innuendo and implied things to a certain degree, but at the end of the day, was still a family show. And I feel the Archive should be a representation of that.

My two cents as a reader: I appreciate that both the archive and this forum are PG-13. IMO, the original show was PG (not even -13), therefore the PG-13 rating to the archive still maintains the integrity of the show.

I also feel there is nothing wrong with n-fic, but have absolutely no desire to read it. I'm glad I have the option of reading fanfic without stumbling across anything that doesn't appeal to me.

One thing that bothers me, though, is the idea that all n-fic is about sex. While our n-fic archive may be predominantly about sex, it doesn't have to be. There are certain things that are n-fic that have nothing to do with sex since there are other kinds of graphic material that don't belong on a PG13 board for good reason.

Part of the reason that it bothers me to say that the n-fic boards only exist for sexual expression is because of the mischaracterization that people that don't read n-fic are anti-sex or judgmental. IMO you may read whatever you want to, but I would prefer to have the option to read only what I want to. Stories can't be unread, so it is better that they are properly labeled and stored in their appropriate archives.

I also don't believe that the archive has shifted in its standards. There have always been two archives. I hope that standard remains, because it works well for this fandom.


Elisabeth

Personally, I have no clue whether the standards changed over the years or not, but I'll take Labby's word for it.

That said, I prefer the archive's stance to remain as it is. It's a good system; and as the adage goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Not everybody wants to read Nfic, as others have said. And I fully empathize with the more conservative readers, even though I'm not necessarily the same way myself (having poked the line with a stick and all).

Tastes change. Yesterday we were conservative. Today we're liberal. Tomorrow, we may be conservative again. It's good to have an archive from which we know what to expect.

My 2 cents.

I simply want to say thank you to Lab Rat and all the other archive GE's editors and otherwise elves, , for your daily committment and hard work to all us folcs. If I knew how to post a thank you banner icon as someone else did, I would. Since I don't my thanks will have to suffice.

Mona

I absolutely agree, Wendy. Labby does a great job! But she doesn’t re-read everything we GE’s say is ‘okay’. I do know that I would ask LabRat if I thought anything was ‘on the fence’. But as LabRat said, we are all different and thus see things differently.

Exactly. You said it (as always) better than I did.


I also declare that Labby rocks!

LOL! Thank you everyone who has posted - your continuing support for the Archive is always very much appreciated. I rely absolutely on the skill and judgement of our editors and have to say that I couldn't imagine working with a more efficient, skillful and hard-working crew as I have done over the years. You guys are the ones who truly rock.

Thank you again for all the kind words.

LabRat

Perhaps I should respond here, too.

No, actually, I meant that the Archive is juvenile when certain standards apply to it. I think that a book can be juvenile even if its author is not, a movie can be juvenile even if its director is not, and an Archive can be juvenile even if its EIC is not.

Absolutely not. I wasn't talking about you personally, but about the rules of the Archive.

These rules do seem to have changed. I have exchanged emails with one FoLC who has three stories on the Archive which she herself believes would not have been accepted today. She thinks that if she had tried to get them uploaded today, they would have been rejected as nfic.

And what about Exhaustedly Happy by Jennifer Eagan-Dixon? It was submitted in March 1999. Would it have been accepted today?

To me, what Carol said in her post about Becky Bain's story seemed to confirm my belief that the rules that apply to the Archive have become more strict than they used to be.

But I didn't mean to accuse you, Labby. It's not as if you are our residen Tyrant-in-Chief who lays down the rules regardless of what your underlings wish. Rather, I think that FoLCs in general must be relatively happy with the rules, because otherwise I think that there would be a general demand for a change in a more liberal direction. Since there has been no such general demand, I just assume that FoLCs tend to be happy with the Archive the way it is.

But it really does seem to me that the rules have changed. If Becky Bain's story could be uploaded, let alone Jennifer Eagan-Dixons fic, but a very unexplicit conversation between Lois and Clark is deemed unacceptable today, then I do think that there has been a change.

As for Becky Bain's story, Labby, you said this:

So in other words it was a case of omission that Becky Bain's story passed through the eye of the needle. The same can't be said about Jennifer Eagan-Dixon's story, because it is basically all about sex. But then again, I don't think you were EIC of the Archive back in 1999.

You also said:

I understand that, and, indeed, I do understand that it is a herculean task to manage the Archive. And, to remain in the realm of metaphors from classical antiquity, it can't be much easier to try to navigate between the Scylla of the liberals and the Charybdis of the conservatives. And I do hope you understand that I have never thought of you as juvenile.

If the standards have changed since you became Editor-in-Chief - and I believe they have - maybe that is simply because the standards have become more consistent since you took over. That is certainly a possibility.

I'm sorry if I offended you, Labby.

Ann

Well, I can't quite agree with your reasoning here, Ann, but thank you for clarifying your comments.

I can't speak to examples when the details are unknown to me. I have no idea whether I'd agree with this author or not and the fact that she believes something doesn't necessarily make it so. However, if this author truly believes that the stories she has on the Archive are nfic – and therefore in clear breach of the Archive's PG13 policy – it's always possible to have them removed.

It's in the same bracket as Becky's story and makes the same point as my earlier posts. I wouldn't upload it as it is, today, but I wouldn't have uploaded it as it is in 1999 either. However, that has to be qualified by the fact that I wasn't EIC in 1999. So I cannot speak to whatever decisions were made by EIC or GE then which led to it being uploaded. Did you consider that its upload might actually have been just a simple error? The Archive has over 3,000 stories uploaded to it. It would be incredible if no mistakes had ever been made during all the years we've been in operation.

Consider this. A while back, one of our new GEs massively underestimated where the line lay. As a result, a story was uploaded to the Archive which was about 70% nfic. As EIC and not having read it, I had no clue something had gone wrong until I received two complaints about its content, just hours after it was uploaded. I read it, realized a mistake had been made and that the only solution was to pull the story from the Archive, get the author and GE to rework it and then upload it again.

Now consider that no one bothered to complain, but simply tutted in disgust, wondered what the heck we were doing, and then moved on to the next story. I would have remained blissfully ignorant that the content was there. Perhaps for years. Or until someone decided to use it as an example in a debate.

Like I say – humans make mistakes. And because they do, I don't really think delving into the Archive to find specific examples here and there actually means very much when it comes to proving or disproving that Archive standards have changed. Trying to speculate on what decisions led to individual uploads almost a decade ago seems pointless.

You are, of course, perfectly entitled to believe that if you want to, Ann. Obviously, I disagree. Partly because I would disagree with you that the text in Carol's story was unexplicit. I read it and IMO, it was very similar in tone to Becky's text and so came into the same category when it came to making my decision to exclude it. Or – actually - not exclude as it was Carol who pointed out the similarity to Becky's text and I conceded precedent and informed her that I would allow it into the Archive on that basis, if she was insistent that it was absolutely necessary to the story.

See above. I would only add that the same guidelines applied then as do now and the story is clearly in breach of them. Which seems to me to indicate that a mistake was made somewhere along the line.

Incidentally, although I'd agree that Jen's story is beyond PG13, I would disagree that it's entirely so. In fact, the first half is mostly well within the PG13 limit and is even beautifully innocent. It's only the second half that things start to go awry. Also, I'm not sure from your comment if you're harbouring the mistaken impression that sex as a subject as and of itself is beyond PG13. In case you are, I can assure you that that's not the case. A story could be entirely about the subject of sex and still be well within PG13 – if the author was clever enough in his/her writing.

As I say, I tend to think it's more a case of mistakes being naturally made here and there over the years. I am absolutely sure that things have slipped through on my watch that shouldn't have, too. And will continue to slip through long after I'm gone. No shift in standards or policy. Just plain and simple human error.

So I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. But, again, I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts on the subject.

LabRat

(emphasis mine)

LOL. That's a whole lot of euphemisms.

alcyone

For myself, I haven't noticed any change in the Archive's standards, and I've been reading since 1999. As you know, I don't write nfic, although I don't mind reading it if it is done tastefully.

The thing is, we *have* an nfic archive. Why should we change the regular Archive, which is a safe place for those who don't wish to read nfic, when we already have a place to put the more racy stuff? There's no rule that says an author can't write an nfic version of her story for those who prefer a slightly more graphic story.

In any case, I think Labby does a fine job as our EIC, and I don't see any need for her to change the standards. Face it, everyone's standards are slightly different. If she changed them every time somebody requested it, the situation would be chaos in no time.

Nan

The possibility that these stories may be removed is precisely why I won't name the author or the titles of the fics. If the person who wrote them is bothered about the possibility that she may have sent nfic to the Archive she can contact you about it herself. Personally I won't call attention to her stories so that they may become targets for complaints.

Anyway, I'm glad that this thread has clarified the content of the conversation between Lois and Clark that Carol removed from part 33 of her story. The deleted scenes did not shed any more light on why Lois is afraid of intimacy, and they did not describe any aspect of the actual togetherness of Lois and Clark. Therefore I agree that they were not essential to the story, and I no longer feel cheated because I didn't get to read them.

Thank you for that clarification, Labby.

Ann

This topic has been an incredibly interesting read, and I'd like to thank everyone for posting their thoughts.

I recently finished an nfic that gets the rating not only for sexual content but also for adult themes. I tried my hand at gficing it because I know there are lots of folcs who don't read nfic (I used to be one of them until my muse decided to write this thing), and I didn't want to exclude them from my audience.

The more I think about it, however, the more I think the story shouldn't have a gfic version after all. I felt like the story lost a lot of it's emotional impact when I removed the explicit references, and even at that, I'm still not sure it would pass the mbs/archive ratings standard, so it may need to be edited down even further.

Anyway, I guess I just wanted to say thanks for this discussion. It's really got me thinking about what does and does not cross the gfic/nfic line, and how that impacts my story.

~Anna

This topic is fascinating every time it comes up. I think I have my thoughts somewhat in order, but no guarantees:

I'd like to get a rundown about what those things are. No snark there, just honest curiosity, because I don't think those things exist in a non-neglible level in this fandom and I wonder how long it would take for there to be enough people for those elements to be treated the way n-fic sex is treated. I say that because I hesitate to think that a fic rated n for violence or swearing (which begs the question of what else goes beyond PG-13?) would necessarily get a wide readership (even in the n-fic folder). That is my impression from my time spent here, people who have been here longer would know more. But I do remember happening on a fic an annesplace where the writer thanked her beta for telling her to take out a swear word because the characters wouldn't swear. Annesplace. I was surprised, to say the least.

That author's note on the swear word (and other old posts I've seen) made me think more about the language I would use even in the _nfic_ folder, where theoretically that sort of thing would be permissible and has precedent (this being a matter apart from the auto-censoring which I won't go into here, though its also interesting to discuss how that affects conventions). What I'm using this example for is to illustrate the fact that there are certain habits that have been nurtured not just by the show, but also by fandom. My point is that having n-fics be predominantly about (hetero) sex, rather than whatever else is out there in say, Harry Potter (an equally family-oriented source and even I shudder), is a convention probably harkening back to the show, but having been run with by fans--which is kinda neat to chew over (and here I've wandered on a tangent, but it happens ). Social contracts and all that jazz.

Actually, a lot of you have mentioned how I feel about the Archive in that for me the rating cap unwittingly (?) keeps it closer to the "spirit" of the show, more so than n-fic can be by its very nature (and here I'm very strictly refering to explicitness). And I add some hit closer to the series than other of course, but the explicitness is a pretty thick line for me. At the same time, I don't think that n-fics are so different from Archive fics outside explicit content that they can be considered a different genre. Although I wouldn't say that to do that wouldn't change a fic. I just don't think it's a comedy-tragedy type of change--that's what I think of when I think of genre.

alcyone

There have been a few fics that weren't considered gfic because of violence and, I think, drug use. I'm wracking my brain, because I know a few, but I'm trying to remember which ones. Maybe someone else can remember.

I do appreciate the archive system, very much.

I was reading an NCIS fic last year sometime. I liked the pairing of the couple - not an obvious one, but I liked it nonetheless and hetero which is the norm here but not always elsewhere [which I know even though I'm not active in any other fandom and rarely seek out other fic] - but it was rated PG13. Okay. No biggie. I can do PG13, but this one was as explicit as anything I'd ever see [well, expect to I guess] on the nfic boards/archive, and then some. And the curse words thrown about... Sheesh! Every other word half the time. We're talking 'f bombs' etc which I found to be totally out of character anyway, besides being offensive. It made me truly appreciate our archive.

There was an occasional 'mild' swear word on L/C but not much. I think that may have been what that A/N was referring to, alcyone. Whether it was in character or not, given the situation. I can 'hear' any of the characters saying 'mild' swear words occasionally, though I think they all have different thresholds where they would. Clark, for instance, I think would usually have to be much more upset than Lois [who might have a thing or two to say about traffic that's not even particularly bad if her farmboy partner scooped her on Superman again]. Clark maybe would swear when he couldn't get there in time and a bunch of people died or Lois was being very careless and got herself in trouble and almost died while she knew he was off fighting a typhoon or something. Perry perhaps for emphasis in a lecture or something. Etc. When I first joined the fandom I was beta'ing for an author and I called her on Jonathan saying 'damn' in a pilot rewrite then found out it was a direct quote so... [at least I think that was how it happened but it's been a while].

Anyway - I really do appreciate the ratings system very much and understand completely why the rule is the way it is.

Carol

This thing about nfic for stories that aren't about sex but have adult themes...is it just the graphic-ness of the scenes, or something else we're talking about?

My story Veritas for example, while not dealing much with sexual matters, does have adult themes about liberty, security, politics and fear. At times it deals with real disasters that have happened in recent months. At times this has sparked some pretty lively debates.

At what point does that kind of a story become TOO adult?

I understand that a story about the aftermath of a rape or some horrendous trauma might make the nfic boards, but what about a story dealing with an unwanted preganacy, or adults taking advantage of children, or the effects of war or the children of an occupation? What about stories about terrorism or hatred or, well, any number of things?

I've written stories about all of these things and never had any problems from anyone.

What is it that makes a non-sexual story n-fic worthy? Is it the offensiveness of individual scenes? Is it the sheer amount of emotional pain the characters suffer?

Is it the idea, or how graphically it is displayed?

Does it take one scene that makes your guts churn to make a whole story an nfic? Or is it a conglomeration of less vivid scenes that work together to create an unsettling overall picture?

(I'm an infrequent reader of nfic, so I really don't know.)

I have a feeling that there is some sort of general consensus among folcs...a sort of community standards thing.

It'd be interesting to know just where people see that line as being, though.

Well, I didn't say it would be a long story.

Yes, that was exactly my point, Ann.

That's a very good point that many authors – especially fledgling authors – sometimes miss, Anna. I've always thought that there as just some stories that you shouldn't try to convert because you rip the heart and soul out of them doing so. When you end up with a story that bears almost no relation to the one you started with and is a pale shadow of its former self, is it really worth it?

Was this an old story, alcyone? There was a time when swear words were about as contentious as nfic and liable to start up intense discussions. I can recall a time when there was debate about whether 'bloody' was beyond PG13. Swearwords are really difficult of course – there are so many variations around the world as to how they are viewed. I know of several words which are mild in the UK but an abomination in the US and vice versa. Only yesterday, John MacEnroe caused moral outrage at the BBC when being interviewed during Wimbledon coverage when he mentioned some players were 'greedy bs'. He was surprised at the furor and said that it was a mild word back home. To be honest, frankly, I thought it was a mild word here in the UK, too, and was somewhat amazed that I was apparently wrong!

Anyway, that might be what prompted the concern from your author.

Yes, sadly another bone of contention, back in the day. Slash fic was definitely frowned on. I know of at least one FoLC who left the fandom after being savaged for writing fic which even touched on the issue in a comedic way. &#61516; It never really erupted very often, that one, though because it seemed to be a topic that few FoLCs were that interested in writing about anyway. There wasn't much appetite for exploring slash relationships within the show's characters and so the genre never became common here as it is in other fandoms. I guess, too, that LNC itself didn't really lend itself to the genre. Clark/Jimmy or Clark/Perry relationships probably aren’t that interesting or obvious to most FoLCs. <G>

Yes, there have been a couple over the years. Not many. Mostly FoLCs seem to naturally rein themselves in when it comes to violence – perhaps feeling it doesn't suit the tone of the show to be too graphic – and so mostly their stories get onto the Archive with a violence warning at the top of the file. And those that do have a violent warning are probably very mild compared to some of the novels you'd find on your supermarket shelves. For some reason I want to say that Laura Davies once put one of her stories into nfic because of its adult themes – but I could just be making that up as I go along. I wouldn't trust my memory on it.

I think on this issue it's mainly been led by the author themselves, Shayne. Some seem to feel that they may get flak for dealing with a particular theme and put it into the nfic folder to pre-empt any potential problem they may have. I think it harks back to how sensitive the issues used to be in the fandom and the number of times fanfic prompted flame wars. Authors got a little wary of even thinking of pushing the envelope, at times, I think. Not, as I say, that these stories have been in any huge numbers.

I think myself that, these days certainly, that most stories would be accepted without any problem. The only thing I personally can think of that would merit a non-sexual story being put into nfic instead of gfic would be extreme and graphic violence. Graphic torture of the characters perhaps?

I can only remember getting one complaint over the years about a story that was uploaded to the Archive being too violent and it was a complaint that I didn't agree with. The author, though, did generously add a warning to it, just to keep the peace. And I recall that I did request that Cindy Leuch put a warning on her story about September 11, because it was submitted in the days after the attack when emotions were still raw and running high and I thought there may be FoLCs who wouldn't want to read about it or appreciate finding themselves reading it unprepared. But I still wouldn't have thought of the story as nfic at all. That never occurred to me at all.

LabRat

This is an interesting topic.

Karen suggested fics about drug use might be ones that are n-fic, but I don't think that's been the case. There are several fics dealing with substance abuse in the archive - Yvonne Connell's alt story about a Clark Kent who "does" red -K, for example.

The archive no-swearing rule seems to be one that has been inconsistently applied over the years. I had wanted to end a story with Clark saying to Lois, "F... you, Lois Lane" but was told I couldn't use that word in g-fic. On the other hand, a story, by another author, with many uses of the banned word was posted a bit later ( a year?)both on the mbs and on the archive. So, who knows how it goes, is my point I guess Take a chance and see what happens.

I always get a kick about people talking about nfic as having more adult themes - define "adult"

(btw, I want to add that it was not my excellent and long-suffering GE who censored the line.)

c.

There is absolutely NO inconsistency with regard to the Fword, Carol. It is NOT PG13 and is unacceptable both on the mbs and the Archive - except in the nfic folder.

If there is a story on the Archive which contains this word - especially if it's repeated many times - please let me have the details so that I can contact the author and it can be edited as this is clearly a mistake and one that is over the line enough that it can't be left standing.

I do recall that some time ago now I discovered that one GE wasn't aware that the word was taboo and I issued a blanket memo to all GEs at that time reminding them that it was. But I wasn't aware at that time that any instances of the word had made their way onto the Archive by accident. IIRC the issue came up as an aside in a conversation I had with the GE in question, unrelated to anything they were working on at the time. So it may be that the story you refer to has no connection with that time and is just an error on its own.

Either way, it's an error that needs to be immediately rectified and I'd appreciate your co-operation in getting there.

LabRat (who just read Carol's post and spit out her Pepsi all over her screen )

I was surprised to read that, too, so I went to use the Archive search function and it yielded no results. I don't think you have anything to be worried about .

Yes, I did a search of the fanfic folder here but got no results. That isn't terribly reassuring because the search engine here is a capricious creature, perfectly capable of telling you a word doesn't exist one day and admitting it does the next.

But the little Google search engine on the Archive is usually quite reliable and I was surprised to find it coming up with no hits either.

I don't recall ever having dealt with a story on the Archive that had the Fword in it, it's not been removed by me or Lauren that I know of, so it's a little concerning that perhaps the search engine is missing it.

Guess we'll never know unless Carol can remember the details or someone else finds it and/or complains.

LabRat

oops - my apologies. I just checked the story on the archive and no f word. The word that was used was s..t. Bad memory on my part.

At any rate, I consider the s word far worse than the f word and so that's probably why the use of an obscenity stuck in my mind.

I'm uncomfortable about citing the specific story, though, especially in "public" on the mbs. If it really matters, let me know. I should add that I was not bothered by the author's use of the word, but rather by the different standard. I certainly don't think that the use of either word warrants the removal of a story.

Also my apology for the Pepsi spew, Labrat - that must have been sticky to clean up. Hope your keyboard isn't gummed up.

c. (rip george carlin)

Of course not. We don't like to remove stories from the Archive unless there's no other choice and in the case of a word being accidentally used which shouldn't be there it's easy enough to just remove it/replace it. Removing the story would be way too drastic a remedy and completely unnecessary. Only really required if the author was insistent that they didn't want the word removed and I can see few instances where the issue couldn't be negotiated to both parties satisfaction.

However, whoever gave you your advice was right, Carol. The S-word is just as taboo for PG13 here on the mbs and on the Archive as the F-word.

I understand your reluctance on giving details - although there's no suggestion that it's the fault of the author at all - and no need as I did a search of the Archive search engine.

Ahem. Seems more than one example has slipped through the net over the years. Which is something of a dilemma as most of them seem to be pretty old stories, the authors of which are going to be impossible to contact.

I'll mark them and have a word with Lauren, see if we can figure out a reasonable solution.

LabRat

Yeah, Lab, it definitely felt like much of the heart and soul of the fic was gone, and taking it down even further would indeed make it a pale shadow of it's former self. I don't think it's worth it, which is why I probably won't post a converted version, but it does make me very sad that some people might miss the story because of it.

Logically though, I shouldn't be sad because no matter what I (or anyone else) write(s), there are going to be some people who will miss the story because they don't want to read that subject matter. It happens all the time. I guess I just need to get over my people-pleasing and accept that.

~Anna

Yeah, it breaks the heart to miss out on extra readers. As you say though, you're never going to get everyone reading, and I'm sure that those who did enjoyed the story.

Now, going back to my previous post - I've been mulling this over during the day and the more I thought about it the more I ended up with a migraine. :p

It's one thing to talk about retrospectively editing old stories when it's one story with the F-word in it. But when it gets to the point of several stories, which would probably have to lead to a wholesale overhaul, I think it's a tad impractical.

Some of the stories in question date back a decade. Some of them even pre-date GEs and the ratings system entirely. Their authors are long gone from the fandom and could, practically, have no input into the editing process now. And even if they could, it seems a little...churlish ... to be contacting them after so many years and asking them to rework their stories.

I'd be less than comfortable editing stories without that input from their authors and - well, where does it end? Do we start editing stories like Jen's EH, already mentioned on this thread? Or Becky's story? And where the story isn't easy to quickly edit, where the erroneous content is wholesale, do we remove those stories?

Minefield, methinks.

So, on the whole, I think the practical and reasonable thing to do is just accept that these mistakes are out there, draw a line under them and work as best we can to ensure there are as few mistakes as possible join them in the future. Especially when we haven't exactly been inundated with complaints about them over the years.

LabRat

I do remember your ruling as EIC on the S-word, LabRat, and I remember the story that provoked it too. I think at the time it was decided that the policy from here on would be that the word is taboo and that earlier stories wouldn't be edited, for precisely the reasons you mention.

As to how to deal with anyone who says - as has been argued here - but this story has that same word, I suspect the simple answer is to say that since then and following complaints (or following your discovery as EIC that one or two GEs had misread where the line was) a ruling was made that the word/phrase/description is unacceptable.

We can't rewrite history and I think it's unreasonable to expect the EIC and/or GEs or Lauren to go back over old stories and re-edit them, especially in cases where the original authors can't even be contacted. As we've said several times, it's an imperfect science. We can only do the best we can.


Wendy

Yes, I agree that there's no point in going back and editing these stories.

Wendy wrote: The person who advised me on the f word as a no-go also beta'd the story that has the s word. But that was nearly a year later, and standards change over time, as Wendy says.

Anyway, no point at all in fussing over the stories now on the archives. Water under the bridge, etc. More importantly, these are works that the writers poured their hearts into. Not to mention the fuss involved for Lauren.

sort of wishing I hadn't commented in the first place.

c.

Carol said:
...and, on reflection, I think that was me. I was never all that sure about how the S-word was regarded and at the time I thought it was okay in moderation. Then LabRat made her EIC ruling and we ran with that policy from then on.

And there you are: a perfect example of how different GEs can have different understandings about where the line lies. It's a very, very difficult balance to get right, and all we can do is our best.


Wendy

I agree and that was very much the line I'd been musing on this afternoon and had decided to adopt in future. GMTA.

I don't think I made a ruling on the S-word so much as I just reminded everyone what it was already. I am fairly sure that I was advised by Kathy when taking over from her what words were taboo. It's just a case of every now and then you need to remind everyone what they are. It's the kind of thing that tends to get lost along the way, I think, and you need to tighten up on it every so often to continue to make sure everyone is on the same page.

LabRat

Would it be improper to replace the vowel in those instances of the S word with an asterisk? Zoom's boards have a censor for language built in, so if I were describing Dean and Teri's conversation under the table in the dailies for AKAS, the censor would put asterisks in place of the entire word. To get around that, I write the words with asterisks in place of the vowels: Dean starts to raise up, bangs his head on the underside of the table, and mutters a surprised, "Sh*t." Then, he adds, "Oops. I guess I shouldn't have said that." Teri feeds him the line again; he starts to raise up, bangs his head on the underside of the table, and mutters a soft, "Oh."

It occurred to me that might be a way to bring existing stories on the archive in line with archive policy without forcing a re-write but still allowing readers to know exactly what the writer intended. But it's just a suggestion. Feel free to ignore it.

This has turned into quite an ‘interesting’ topic. I was on my way to bed, but I thought I'd check my email first. And that brought me back to this topic in the middle of the night.

It would be interesting to see the text that Carol deleted from Learning to Love.

~~~~~

Hmm... That’s very interesting. I consider the f word far worse. But you saying this made me think. I hear the f word FAR more often than the s word. That includes what I hear from the teens (most with behavioral problems) I work with.

~~~~~~~~

Well said, LabRat. (But I’m glad there were no stories with the f word because then I’d think they would need editing.)

Thanks for the suggestion, Sheila, but, to be honest, I've never really understood this convention.

I remember, years ago when I was first reading stories on the Archive I'd notice that they used that method often to get around people using the word 'god'. It would be G_d or something similar. And I could never understand what the difference was between that and just plain 'god' itself. It's obvious when reading what the word is intended to be, so wouldn't you be just as well using the actual word?

So it's a convention that's always baffled me. But perhaps there's a point to it that I'm missing and someone can enlighten me.

Nancy, I've never been aware that 'bloody' is a taboo word in the UK. It's always been perfectly innocuous as far as I've always known. I do recall that it was considered a no no to use when I was a kid, which would often lead to kids chanting a rebuttal when chided by their peers for using it:

"Bloody's in the Bible
Bloody's in the book
If you don't believe me
Take a bloody look!"



But that was in the sixties. It hasn't caused many waves that I've known about in any recent decade.

LabRat

True enough, Wendy. Also as I recall, you were even more ruthless about my abuse of commas, and understandably so.

c.

Thanks, Labby. It has been longer than a decade since the lady from the UK told me that it was not a nice word.

I have read this thread with interest. I learned what a GE is.

I hope the stories in the archieves will be left alone and not altered for language. I am not sure of the ages here but it doesn't appear to me that anyone here is under 18. That said I know language is a big deal for some people. I think you draw as much attention to a word with the asterisk as you do the actual letter.

Thanks for all the hard work that everyone assocated with the archives does to keep in running.

Oh, I think there are more than a few forum members under that age. At least, I know there used to be. And we have no clue what the ages are of the readers of the Archive - they could conceivably cover a large age range. Not all readers of the Archive are also members here and it's an open website.

But really the age of the readership is less relevant than the fact that the Archive has submission rules and one of them currently is that these words are beyond the PG13 and should not be present in submitted stories. (And the same PG13 rule applies on the forum here, with the exception of the nfic folder, of course.)

LabRat

There are a few. I know there is a least one story on the archive that was written by a 14 or 15 year old. And as Labby said, there are occasionally teens on the board, too.

LabRat wrote:
There's no way for me to know if this is the reason, but in the Orthodox Jewish faith people don't write out "God" because it's the name of the most holy being, so they substitute "G_d" to keep from writing out His title or His Name. Even people of Jewish heritage who become Christians often retain this convention.

And I recall a terse conversation I had with my high school English teacher (who was universally disliked due to her poor attitude towards her students) summarily informed me that the name of a specific deity had to be capitalized. I didn't mind the information, but I did mind being given this piece of data along with a good deal of disdainful condescension.

I don't use profanity in my stories. I even discovered while writing one of my earlier stories that a certain five-letter word referring to one's posterior doesn't mean that in some English-speaking countries. I have learned to delete that word from my L&C writing to prevent unnecessarily offending people. To throw in my two cents' worth, I agree with the non-rude word policy. I understand that others don't, and that's okay. We're all individuals who belong to a community, and as such we need some standards just to keep order.

I'll give it a shot, LabRat. Using an asterisk in place of the vowels in obscenities is just like our writing "the f word" or "the s word" in this thread. Everyone here knows exactly which words we're referring to, so shouldn't we just use the real words?

No, of course not. Knowing what word we're referencing is NOT the same as having to read it. Using the asterisk in dialog is a way to indicate the language the character is using without anyone having to actually read it.

If reading obscenities spoken by a character doesn't bother people, they probably won't see the difference that removal of the vowels makes, but it's there. It's approximately the same difference as hearing "shoot" vs hearing the actual word that "shoot" stands for.

Then again, maybe it's just me. I'm very visual, so I don't necessarily read aloud every word in my head. When I see a curse word with the vowels missing, I don't pronounce it in my head, any more than I try to pronounce Klingon names in Star Trek novels. I sort of use a mental place-holder for those names, recognizing who they refer to without bothering to "say" the name mentally. I do something similar with the curse words that are missing their vowels.

For people who feel that "it's obvious when reading what the word is intended to be," an asterisk won't affect their reading of the dialog. But for some people who prefer not to read that language, it allows a mental "out-of-sight, out-of-mind" sleight-of-hand.

That probably isn't clearer than it was before, but I don't know how to explain it better.

Thanks for that, Terry and, now that you mention it, I do seem to recall hearing something of the same at the time. I'd forgotten that.

That's probably very true. It still doesn't seem quite the same thing as 'the f word' for me - it seems more of several lengths further along from that, more explicit than 'the f word', taking it to several next degrees, but I think you're right that it's probably all down to how we view the word in the first place as to whether it works as a tactic for us or not.

I'm obviously very firmly in this group, which is probably no surprise as in real life I'm afraid I'm extremely casual with language which would make a sailor's parrot blush.

So you're right in that I do tend to read the whole word, my brain not being fooled by asterisk substitution at all.

LabRat

FWIW, using "the S word" is a bit more ambiguous - my kids seem to think that "the S word" means "stupid". I've just always figured, if there is anyone who doesn't know what it means, I'd rather not be the one who tells them. Innocence is a vanishing thing, these days, so I don't want to be the one removing one more tiny bit.

And for some people "shoot" is a perfectly acceptable word, whereas the real s-word is distasteful. Those who are comfortable with mentally translating it can do so, but those who aren't don't have to tune anything out.

Also, I think there can be a difference in perception between hearing something and reading it. Something that your ear has learned to ignore can still be startling to your eyes. And vice-versa. Dunno why. And of course everyone's got different comfort levels with different words. There are words I know and sometimes use, that I try not to use in front of my kids.

I'll shut up now

Except that reminds me, I have a policy against telling my kids to shut up. I'll say "hush up" instead. The alternative words that people come up with can be fascinating.

Okay, I'll hush up now

PJ

One last comment about asterisks: in certain dictionary/spelling programs, they function as global wild-cards, which means they can stand for as many characters as needed. Being familiar with using asterisks that way, I can read sh*t as shot, shoot, or shadowiest, and f*ck can be frick, frack, or firetruck--as well as the curse words they stand for.

In view of the recent discussion, I thought this might be of interest. Personally, I think with examiners like this one, is it any wonder our kids are leaving school with linguistic skills barely above monkey. :rolleyes:

[Source: BBC News Website]

LabRat

I'm an extremely auditory person. To see it is to read it is to hear it. Asterisks make no difference.


Elisabeth

Adding my thoughts to this interesting conversation...

We are a worldwide community here with a unique culture, built around a PG, family oriented show. Part of that culture includes the use of beta readers on the message boards and general editors for the archive, and I believe that has resulted in the generally high quality of fiction that is written by this fandom.

When I first began reading stories here (way back when the show was still on the air), I found an immediate sense for the stories I most enjoyed (WAFFY, B-plot driven, revelation) and concluded by the sheer number of stories written with these plots and the number of responses those stories generated, that many people in this fandom also enjoyed those types of stories. It seems natural that this would be the case because we were drawn to this fandom by a show that included a romantic element.

Certainly, though, there are other stories to tell. As a writer, it is respectful to consider the audience for whom you are writing. Since we are a worldwide community, it is likely that there are people with divergent opinions, and it is considerate to warn them of the type of content you intend to write about. Since there is a seperate place for writers interested in exploring mature themes, it is considerate to post those types of stories there.

Adding information in a story summary or at the beginning of a post to let potential readers know that the story may not be of interest to them is respectful. After all, writers enjoy positive feedback. Writers should want to seek out potential readers who are interested in what they have to write. It benefits both parties to steer unintended audiences away.

Deciding the line between PG-13 and beyond is ultimately open to interpretation. The culture of this community is different than the culture of other communities, and the line may move more conservatively on that issue here.

Several years ago at my school, two 14-year old girls did a History Day project on Frida Kahlo. Their exhibit contained examples of her art and analyzed their interpretation of it. One example they used was "The Broken Column". Their project won at both the school site and school district competitions. When they submitted it to the county competition, it was pulled before judging, deemed "pornographic." The county superintendent of schools happened to walk into the exhibit hall before the public exhibition and felt it was inappropriate for 14 year olds to be dealing with such issues and didn't want the public to feel like the county school board supported it. Two communities had deemed the project award winning, another viewed it a different way. Ultimately, I had to accept that it benefited the community at large to prevent people from unwittingly being confronted with something they might interpret as offensive.

In considering the use of curse words, a writer again has to consider the community. Is the use of the actual word integral to the story? If so, warnings and/or posting to the nfic side are respectful. But if not, writers can use the power of language to convey a wide range of imagery and emotion without having to resort to specific four letter words. Beta readers and general editors can help authors develop more powerful writing styles by challenging them to develop wider vocabularies. And this, as I said, ultimately contributes to the quality of the fandom's writing as a whole.

The culture of this community is why have I have stayed here for so many years. Intelligent conversation, respectful debate, excellent fiction writing - we're really lucky to have it all.