Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?

[gulplum]

Carolyn wrote:

> ... I feel distinctly nastier about FILKS. I'm afraid I really 
> cannot stand these, and personally never look at them after 
> glancing at a few early on. Apart from anything else, I have never 
> heard of most of the songs they are based on, which makes them 
> meaningless. 
> 
> I suppose they are easy to spot, like Tbay, so equally easy to 
> ignore if you want to. However, I'd still like to understand the 
> rationale for them being on the main list. They seem to me to be 
> somewhere between fanfic and OTC.

Ahh... I was wondering when this subject would crop up, and although 
I was going to raise it elsewhere, this is perhaps an opportunity to 
get my thoughts out of the way.

Although I recognise most of the songs, and I enjoy and admire 
filking as an art, I agree that filks really should have no place on 
the main list. However, they're fairly infrequent (I'd estimate one 
post in 500) and they don't generate threads, so perhaps banning 
Caius and others from the main list is a little harsh (and 
unnecessary).

Most of the time, I enjoy reading them (although, truth be said, 
their quality is very variable) and they do relieve the atmosphere 
occasionally. However, they don't actually add anything to discussing 
canon and so if we were apply the rules strictly, they should be 
limited to OT-C.

So, in summary, I don't feel strongly enough to suggest banning them 
to OT-C, but they *can* give the impression of being privileged which 
is never a good idea.

Incidentally, something I've been meaning to say for a long time, is 
that, if filks are to be left on the main list, could the "filk" 
header please be at the beginning of the subject rather than the end? 
It's not always there at present (for starters, this helps in sorting 
large numbers of posts).

Oh, BTW (and off topic): Shaun, were you really implying that the 
sincere -> "sine cera" etymology was actually included in your Latin 
textbook at school? I didn't realise that this particular canard was 
quite so well-established! (Not to mention, the author of any such  
textbook would have to be an idiot and not know his subject as well 
as he thought.)