Shadowknight12

But what if you ARE writing for potted plants???

Taking the Sky from Kaylee review:
Without confirming or denying my parents marital status at my birth, it's a fair assessment and I thank you for it. Unfortunately, being as the review is of me rather than the story, I fear I may have to delete it under the flames guidelines as it takes site staff somewhat longer to do so (and they are cheerfully dedicated to keeping the database for allowed data only, what with size and stability and all). Have yourself a nice day, y'hear!

Oh, hey! I remembered a sexy song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXp413NynFk

Actually - I'm not. It's foolish to think that someone who owns and operates the 2nd largest fan fiction website on the internet would be ignorant of copyright laws. Not only have I had discussions with various legal sources, I did my own research prior to consulting with them. Your arguments hold no water.
Please also note, that as you are intent on infringing on EL James' copyright, your information including IP address data has been sent to both her and her editor along with copies of what was posted to this site and our removal of it.
I wish you luck with your faulty arguments if and when they decide to send you a C&D letter
I'd say happy writing, but it is apparent that you much prefer taking someone elses work in it's entirety as opposed to creating something of your own.

As per the offical website: http://www.copyright...17/92appii.html
Broken down to easy to understand terms: http://www.templeton.../copymyths.html
Heaven forbid the expedient application of our ToS and copyright law be consider tyrannical - Let's go after the gov't - How dare they create copyright law! It's tyrannical I tell you!!

Copyright is implied and automatically granted even if not implicitly stated to any work from April 1, 1989 forward, please re-read your copyright law. Again, you are incorrect.

Okay deary - First off, DG is my right hand woman; it is a cold day in hell when her and I aren't on the same page, but you can't get any higher than me - I own the site. Since your ignorance of copyright law is amazing, let us have a little lesson:
Fan Fiction is considered to be a transformative or derivative work which by the US Copyright Act defines as:
17 U.S.C. § 103(b) states:
They further more defined it further in a later publication (US Copyright Office Circular 14: Derivative Works)
Therefore, a legal case can be made that fan fiction can be copyrighted so long as there is a large amount of new material.
To apply it to this particular instance, EL James used only the character's names and descriptions, creating her own characterizations, settings, plot and world, which can be regarded as a substantial amount of new material.
While to date, there has been no formal testing of this in court to the very end, Salinger v. Colting is an excellent example. While there was initially an injunction from the District Court, the Appellate court reversed the injunction and sent it back down for the 'fair use' and transformative work doctrine to be reapplied. Unfortunately for those of us waiting to see how this would ultimately be determined, the parties settled out of court and it was never fully tested in a court of law.
That being said, Master of the Universe is not public domain and you may not post it (or the same story with names changed) on AFF. The story was a product of her imagination that while she changed names to create a original work, is hers in its entirety - Both versions.
We have removed your posting of the story from our site and it may not be republished.

Master of the Universe was published by EL James as a fanfiction. It's still HER original work. You cannot post that here. You cannot attempt to pose as another, as you're obviously doing. Because it started life as fanfiction does not make it automatically public domain.

Indeed. Main reason I stopped reviewing!

Anything by Santana is sexy....

Oh, hey! I remembered a sexy song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXp413NynFk

Best. Brothel name. Ever.

*points at custom title*
Cough.

I think reviews are marvelous, and I love getting them. I'm also aware that most of my fandom works aren't in the more "popular" arenas, and the traffic past my little fics is meagre as best. How sad for me, but those are the breaks.
Still, I'll write whether or not I get reviews. But they do make me very, very happy.

Best. Brothel name. Ever.

Hi hi folks!
I like this idea of having a research help thread! I'm fairly good with Japanese culture and mythology, as well as East-Coast Canada and Quebec history; who knows, it might get useful to someone. I also have general gaming knowledge, developping companies, marketing, MMORPGs, and video game QA (I'm currently working for a localization team for a third-party QA company). If you need French language-related questions, French is my main language (hence my localization job, in French). I'm a Final Fantasy geek too XD.
As for what I need help with... let's start with the basics. *clears throat*
I write slash/yaoi mostly; that, I'm fine on its own XD. I'm heavily inspired by videogame storytelling; I like sword fights, I like action/adventure, I like epic storylines. Combined with my newly-discovered love for what I could call Viking metal, I've taken a liking to the Norse mythology, which has led me to create a plot about a rag-tag team of various people going on a journey, each with their own goal and stuff. Typical action/adventure story with a healthy dose of slash. (I like my gay warriors, seriously, we need more of those in the videogame world. Skyrim is made of win for that.)
My problem is that I have little knowledge of Norse CULTURE. Mythology, I have access to. Culture... it's getting harder to find information. Especially when it comes to daily life, rituals, social/cultural taboos, food and so on. My story will most likely be a mix of the Viking Age idealized epics and the more accurate Norse culture.
So, even if I'm not sticking to either/or parts, I need inspiration to make it a little more believable than the romanced version of the Vikings, but epic enough to make it less boring.
Even if it's just basic culture-related links, I'd greatly appreciate help for this.
Thank you for your help! ^^

XD Definitely. My current bottom is not one of those. He's about as manly-looking and -acting as his top, if not a little more generally aggressive because he feels he always has something to prove, even when it may or may not be the case. It's something that I intended to play on his personality a lot right from the beginning. (To quote that website RogueMudBlood refered me to, "Them's fighting words!" would be something I expect him to say eventually).
I don't like the "pretty gay boy that's unable to fight and eventually dies" character archetype, so even my pretty boys tend to be hardened warriors who very well know how to fight.

That study is highly questionable, mainly because it suffers from clear gender bias. A proper study would have had cross-references with different genders and sexualities (female tears on straight women, straight/bi men, gay/bi women and gay men; male tears on straight/bi women, straight men, gay women and gay/bi men). The study as is presents more questions than it actually answers. What is the alleged pheromone or chemical those tears have? Nobody thought to run a simple HPLC on the tears? If they had enough to significantly wet a piece of paper (several, in fact), it's ridiculous that you couldn't spare a few microlitres for HPLC, spectrophotometry, spectrometry, gaseous chromatography or anything that actually lets you figure out what chemical is causing what effect (and in the event that tears contain several unknown components, then you repeat the test with a pure sample of each unknown chemical and see which one gives you the same reactions on the test subjects).
Furthermore, the study leaves unanswered whether this is a gender-specific mechanism (i.e., if only women have it), a sexuality-specific mechanism (i.e., if only those who are sexually attracted to the gender of the crying person find their arousal diminished), or if it's a species-wide mechanism (i.e., everyone, regardless of gender or sexuality, will find their arousal reduced when they encounter the tears of any other human being).
And finally, there's the most gaping, ridiculously ignored fact: the effect a pheromone or volatile olfactory chemical substance has is extremely limited. We have pheromones in our hair and skin and their ranges have been repeatedly confirmed: you have to be very close in order to feel the effects. If the effect tears have is biological, then it should only work within a certain range, which is empirically not the case. There is a psychological (or sociological) component to the whole issue and trying to be simplistic/reductionist and blame it all on biology lets us wash our hands of psychosociological responsibility.
That is the worst kind of science: the sensationalist kind. I'm pretty sure everyone already knew what the study was going to turn up and they simply went through the motions to publish something sensationalist. Ugh. I wouldn't be surprised if they faked or rushed the whole thing and nobody bothered to fact-check or repeat it.

Are you kidding me? That is exactly the sort of thing you waste money on. You pay a bunch of scientists to half-ass a study that nobody will cross-check because it's neither socially controversial nor a scientific breakthrough, and you publicise it with the intention of perpetuating a social stereotype and halt social progress.
EDIT: In case it needs to be stated, this keeps perpetuating that a woman's natural state is to passively cry and hope for the best whenever something threatens her, and that her main weapons are her tears.
EDIT 2: Yes, I know how the study was done. I went and found the actual published paper.

That study is highly questionable, mainly because it suffers from clear gender bias. A proper study would have had cross-references with different genders and sexualities (female tears on straight women, straight/bi men, gay/bi women and gay men; male tears on straight/bi women, straight men, gay women and gay/bi men). The study as is presents more questions than it actually answers. What is the alleged pheromone or chemical those tears have? Nobody thought to run a simple HPLC on the tears? If they had enough to significantly wet a piece of paper (several, in fact), it's ridiculous that you couldn't spare a few microlitres for HPLC, spectrophotometry, spectrometry, gaseous chromatography or anything that actually lets you figure out what chemical is causing what effect (and in the event that tears contain several unknown components, then you repeat the test with a pure sample of each unknown chemical and see which one gives you the same reactions on the test subjects).
Furthermore, the study leaves unanswered whether this is a gender-specific mechanism (i.e., if only women have it), a sexuality-specific mechanism (i.e., if only those who are sexually attracted to the gender of the crying person find their arousal diminished), or if it's a species-wide mechanism (i.e., everyone, regardless of gender or sexuality, will find their arousal reduced when they encounter the tears of any other human being).
And finally, there's the most gaping, ridiculously ignored fact: the effect a pheromone or volatile olfactory chemical substance has is extremely limited. We have pheromones in our hair and skin and their ranges have been repeatedly confirmed: you have to be very close in order to feel the effects. If the effect tears have is biological, then it should only work within a certain range, which is empirically not the case. There is a psychological (or sociological) component to the whole issue and trying to be simplistic/reductionist and blame it all on biology lets us wash our hands of psychosociological responsibility.
That is the worst kind of science: the sensationalist kind. I'm pretty sure everyone already knew what the study was going to turn up and they simply went through the motions to publish something sensationalist. Ugh. I wouldn't be surprised if they faked or rushed the whole thing and nobody bothered to fact-check or repeat it.

That study is highly questionable, mainly because it suffers from clear gender bias. A proper study would have had cross-references with different genders and sexualities (female tears on straight women, straight/bi men, gay/bi women and gay men; male tears on straight/bi women, straight men, gay women and gay/bi men). The study as is presents more questions than it actually answers. What is the alleged pheromone or chemical those tears have? Nobody thought to run a simple HPLC on the tears? If they had enough to significantly wet a piece of paper (several, in fact), it's ridiculous that you couldn't spare a few microlitres for HPLC, spectrophotometry, spectrometry, gaseous chromatography or anything that actually lets you figure out what chemical is causing what effect (and in the event that tears contain several unknown components, then you repeat the test with a pure sample of each unknown chemical and see which one gives you the same reactions on the test subjects).
Furthermore, the study leaves unanswered whether this is a gender-specific mechanism (i.e., if only women have it), a sexuality-specific mechanism (i.e., if only those who are sexually attracted to the gender of the crying person find their arousal diminished), or if it's a species-wide mechanism (i.e., everyone, regardless of gender or sexuality, will find their arousal reduced when they encounter the tears of any other human being).
And finally, there's the most gaping, ridiculously ignored fact: the effect a pheromone or volatile olfactory chemical substance has is extremely limited. We have pheromones in our hair and skin and their ranges have been repeatedly confirmed: you have to be very close in order to feel the effects. If the effect tears have is biological, then it should only work within a certain range, which is empirically not the case. There is a psychological (or sociological) component to the whole issue and trying to be simplistic/reductionist and blame it all on biology lets us wash our hands of psychosociological responsibility.
That is the worst kind of science: the sensationalist kind. I'm pretty sure everyone already knew what the study was going to turn up and they simply went through the motions to publish something sensationalist. Ugh. I wouldn't be surprised if they faked or rushed the whole thing and nobody bothered to fact-check or repeat it.

That's really interesting! Though I question the science in that, since pheromones are usually lipidic, volatile compounds that need an oil-based medium, like the oils in your skin and hair, not the salty water that makes up tears. Not to mention the fact that I'm pretty sure that sort of thing wouldn't be gender-based (as pheromones aren't) and there's the unfortunate fact that a lot of people get turned on by people crying during sex.
I should know: I read fan fiction.

I'm always willing to offer what little I know in terms of my own background and interests. I've worked in finance, and at some rather odd jobs as well such as in a cemetery. I read extensively and love history. I'm working on my skills as a rogue... ::looks at shortbow in closet and lockpicks on desk::
Oh, and I'm very good at snark.

For you, my favorite paladin, I always have time!

I saw something similar in another forum and I thought this'd be a good way to celebrate coming back to AFF. Sometimes we are struck with questions when we're writing and we don't know who to ask, so I figured this might be a great way for the forum to pour our expertise together.
This is how it works: you ask questions and someone who knows about the subject comes in and answers them! I'm a biochem major, so I know about science-y and medical stuff, but we have all sorts of people on the forums with their own areas of expertise, so we can all help each other out when a niggling doubt eats away at us or when we need something explained to us.
Without further adieu, let's get this research party started!