But suggesting I don't compare one era of Doctor Who with another? Why? If I criticised Moffat and said RTD did it better, would that warrant the same suggestion? I often compare stuff in New Who to stuff in classic, should I move on from that too?
Saying I wish for a let up in constant RTD v Moffat warring =/= saying there should never be any comparisons, ever. I'd hazard a guess that you wouldn't think ever letting an episode go past without a plethora of complaints about who it's better than/not as good as Classic or not as good as RTD was terribly fun either - and I'd agree! I just find so much of fandom jumping on every oppportunity to tell us how superior the current showrunner to the last one every bit as unpleasant as all the other options would be.
I hope I've replied to comments reasonably and not encouraged that in this post, at least
If I criticised Moffat and said RTD did it better, would that warrant the same suggestion?
No mention if it's okay to go "Moffat that was shit, RTD did it better."
And no argument with, f'rinstance:
But surely you know that the only time that rule is allowed is when you're comparing Moffat!Who to RTD!Who and telling everyone HOW MUCH BETTER IT WAS IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN RUSSELL WAS IN CHARGE! *eyeroll*
Is absolutely portraying dislike of RTD v Moffat wars as mean-y RTD fans being mean. Because just as it's easier for you to rant about "never" being "allowed" to compare RTD v Moffat than a suggestion that maybe everyone doing it a bit less would be a good thing, it's easier to allow the facade that your only critics are RTD-stans, rather than people who actually sometimes like and sometimes dislike both RTD and Moffat. And this exageration and selective presentation is very much symptomatic of sectarian fannish thinking and it's horrible that saying anything about it gets you pulled into the crossfire.
no subject
Saying I wish for a let up in constant RTD v Moffat warring =/= saying there should never be any comparisons, ever. I'd hazard a guess that you wouldn't think ever letting an episode go past without a plethora of complaints about who it's better than/not as good as Classic or not as good as RTD was terribly fun either - and I'd agree! I just find so much of fandom jumping on every oppportunity to tell us how superior the current showrunner to the last one every bit as unpleasant as all the other options would be.
I hope I've replied to comments reasonably and not encouraged that in this post, at least
If I criticised Moffat and said RTD did it better, would that warrant the same suggestion?
No mention if it's okay to go "Moffat that was shit, RTD did it better."
And no argument with, f'rinstance:
But surely you know that the only time that rule is allowed is when you're comparing Moffat!Who to RTD!Who and telling everyone HOW MUCH BETTER IT WAS IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN RUSSELL WAS IN CHARGE! *eyeroll*
Is absolutely portraying dislike of RTD v Moffat wars as mean-y RTD fans being mean. Because just as it's easier for you to rant about "never" being "allowed" to compare RTD v Moffat than a suggestion that maybe everyone doing it a bit less would be a good thing, it's easier to allow the facade that your only critics are RTD-stans, rather than people who actually sometimes like and sometimes dislike both RTD and Moffat. And this exageration and selective presentation is very much symptomatic of sectarian fannish thinking and it's horrible that saying anything about it gets you pulled into the crossfire.