That word might not mean what we think it means.

[logovo]

Reading some stuff today I saw several people talking about aca-fans (acafans? AcaFans?) and I'm starting to wonder if they mean the same thing I'm thinking when I hear acafans, as in actual people in academia, writing, publishing, teaching or fanlore's entry. Are people now using that word interchangeably with fans who are just into meta? Anyone else getting that impression?

Also, I still haven't watched SPN and I'm trying not to read spoilers but I'M FAILING SO BAD. Because I'm weak and impatient.

Comments

[logovo]

Thanks!

It's the third one that really stopped me in my tracks this week, because it's news to me that participating in a meta post would make one an aca-fan. Also, I'm afraid that it's starting to get the ring of an insult, the way that people say BNFs, althoug probably worse.

[isagel]

Hasn't it always been a bit of an insult, coming from some quarters? The academic approach seems to stomp all over some people's fun, though I've never understood why.

[logovo]

I didn't get the insult vibe until days ago, but I do moderate meta reading, so I'm missing out on some discussions, specially those in posts that are very much against meta the aca-fan label has been invoked.

[rodo]

No, not a new trend. It's at least two years old. I first noticed it in 2007, and yes, it can be used in an us ("real fans") vs. them ("those who are harshing our squee") sense.

[logovo]

I think it's only just trickling into my sphere, because I rarely read comms. I first heard the term aca-fen only 2-3 years ago, and it was in the context of academics actually writing and publishing. Thanks for the clarification.