IDB

lurker wrote:i'm always a bit confused that apparently the consensus is that dan often sounds condescending because i never thought that before i started lurking here. this is not me saying y'all are wrong and i'm right, i just thought it might be interesting to hear that as well. i've shortly mentioned it before with the explanation of words (which i appreciate, not being a native speaker), but in other instances as well i just get the impression that he's trying to be inclusive.for the latest video as well, it seemed to me that he was aiming to make it a "complete thing" that someone could watch who had never thought about this particular train of thoughts before and be entertained nevertheless. i agree with the constructive criticism i've read on here regarding whether he succeeded with that or not. however i didn't get the impression at all that he was trying to make it seem as if he was a philosophy professor lecturing us, mere peasants, about the importance of the meme-y subject he has done so much research on.

maybe the hierarchy of needs comment ("if you're a nerd") rubbed some people the wrong way and, yeah, i'd probably agree that it might have done the video good if he'd left that out and made a personal connection instead, for example an anecdote about how or when he came up with this ("shit i think about when i stay up until 4 a.m."). i also think it'd be cool if he extended the positivity to "it's okay to stay up late on a wikipedia spiral and then feel like an expert on the topic" -- part of his branding is being a relatable nerd, so why the "if you're a nerd comments", i don't fully understand. but i also think he added that in, well, in order to try to be inclusive and not to alienate part of his audience. which i personally think is totally fine.

last but not least, maybe it'd be cool if dan made videos where he went in-depths with a topic. i don't know yet, but it'd sure be interesting to see. if he did that, of course he'd need to do more research in order not to state factually wrong stuff. in this case and in general however, i don't think it's necessary to be an expert on every topic you talk about. in contrast, it can be interesting to see how a person who only pursues a topic as a past-time approaches it. transformative media would be pretty boring if everyone was only allowed to write or talk about disciplines they have a degree in.

I agree with you lurker, especially the parts I've bolded. Looking forward to what direction he goes with his next main channel vid. Probs back to ISG or a Vidcon stage performance for something less controversial, and maybe the tinder spon after that?

dontpanic wrote: edit: this is a bit off topic as well, but I remembered that dan's mom has a philosophy degree and I'm suddenly curious how much he talks to her about stuff like this...I know his 'rents don't watch his videos, but tbh if he ever wished to show one to his mom it would be this one.

I'm surprised this hasn't been discussed. I wonder whether his Mum would just be straight up blunt with him about her opinions on it, whether she would incite a discussion regarding it... it's an interesting thought.

Also, does anyone know what general career Dan's Mum has? (Because as interesting as I find philosophy, I do often wonder what careers can come from it).

lurker wrote:In contrast, it can be interesting to see how a person who only pursues a topic as a past-time approaches it. transformative media would be pretty boring if everyone was only allowed to write or talk about disciplines they have a degree in.

I think it’s been made clear that no one expects Dan to have a degree in philosophy before he talks about philosophical concepts. It’s not about that. But as plath has said in their last post, everyone can look up the stuff they want to talk about before they talk about it. You can always crack open a book or you can use the internet to your advantage. The internet is not that big bad place full of wrong information if you know how to use it right, which I think Dan does, the internet basically being his job and all. No one’s asking him to become an expert in philosophy before making a light-hearted video about memes. I think we just would’ve liked him to prepare the video a bit better.

For example I know a lot of screenwriters who write historical stuff without having a degree in history at all. What they do is they invest time and work in research to get their stuff as historically authentic as possible and it’s fascinating watching them do that. Dan obviously doesn’t need to spend weeks researching stuff for a six minute Youtube video but it’s the same thing on a smaller scale. Nobody wants him to get a degree in philosophy here, but I think we do want him to read up on the things he talks about before he films.

I've been away all day (at a cat cafe! all i could think about was the underrated lessamazingphil video 'CAT CAFÉ!!'), so belated thoughts on things:

- Phil's tweet about shirtless men washing horses: amazing and also great

- Dan's Facebook answer insinuating dnp are family: wonderful and also :') :') :')

- Is Dan condescending? I admit that I have thought so in the past, but having read posts from people here who've interpreted Dan as attempting to be inclusive of people of different ages, languages, backgrounds etc I reevaluated. I think you could def be right, and I'd rather he explain himself so that his live shows are accessible to as many people as possible than assume everyone has the same knowledge as he does.

As far as his most recent video goes, I don't think he came across as condescending necessarily, but I do think his argument is inherently presumptuous. He presented his argument as universal, despite it being relevant only for people in his position of social privilege as a wealthy white man. That rubbed me the wrong way personally, and while 'condescending' is probably not the right word to use for that video, I did leave it feeling "spoken down to" and ignored.

Katka wrote:

lurker wrote:In contrast, it can be interesting to see how a person who only pursues a topic as a past-time approaches it. transformative media would be pretty boring if everyone was only allowed to write or talk about disciplines they have a degree in.

I think it’s been made clear that no one expects Dan to have a degree in philosophy before he talks about philosophical concepts. It’s not about that. But as plath has said in their last post, everyone can look up the stuff they want to talk about before they talk about it. You can always crack open a book or you can use the internet to your advantage. The internet is not that big bad place full of wrong information if you know how to use it right, which I think Dan does, the internet basically being his job and all. No one’s asking him to become an expert in philosophy before making a light-hearted video about memes. I think we just would’ve liked him to prepare the video a bit better.

For example I know a lot of screenwriters who write historical stuff without having a degree in history at all. What they do is they invest time and work in research to get their stuff as historically authentic as possible and it’s fascinating watching them do that. Dan obviously doesn’t need to spend weeks researching stuff for a six minute Youtube video but it’s the same thing on a smaller scale. Nobody wants him to get a degree in philosophy here, but I think we do want him to read up on the things he talks about before he films.

point noted, but i do want to clarify that i was exaggerating -- i didn't mean to imply anyone thought dan needed to actually get a philosophy degree before being able to speak about the topic. and i do agree that he'd have to do it if he were to make an actual philosophical video, say, about nihilism. i'd be interested to see him tackle something a topic like that more deeply, and i'd be disappointed if it'd be a summary of the first post that comes up when you google the word. however the point that i wanted to make was that in my opinion, this criticism doesn't really apply to the video we have -- it just doesn't seem to me as if there was content in the video that specifically needed more reading up on his behalf.

maybe he could have done a completely different, deeper video with more research, no arguing here. i personally think that the video could have done with more concision, and reviewing beforehand, but as far as i'm concerned, it didn't need more preparation.

Susanisnotafish wrote:Looking forward to what direction he goes with his next main channel vid. Probs back to ISG or a Vidcon stage performance for something less controversial, and maybe the tinder spon after that?

i could...somewhat see isg happening...but maybe it hasn't been long enough yet? i'm kind of hoping it's neither of the above, i'd like to see another daniel howell original first. i'm curious about the tinder spon, but at the same time, i don't really want to see it

captainspacecoat wrote:Is Dan condescending? I admit that I have thought so in the past, but having read posts from people here who've interpreted Dan as attempting to be inclusive of people of different ages, languages, backgrounds etc I reevaluated. I think you could def be right, and I'd rather he explain himself so that his live shows are accessible to as many people as possible than assume everyone has the same knowledge as he does.

As far as his most recent video goes, I don't think he came across as condescending necessarily, but I do think his argument is inherently presumptuous. He presented his argument as universal, despite it being relevant only for people in his position of social privilege as a wealthy white man. That rubbed me the wrong way personally, and while 'condescending' is probably not the right word to use for that video, I did leave it feeling "spoken down to" and ignored.

ah that's really reason why i like this platform, seeing things from different points of view is so interesting and i think it's really cool that what others and i said let you see it from a different perspective. i think part of it also really comes down to tone and someone's own personality, so it's really not something to be "wrong" or "right". as for your last point, i agree that his argument isn't universal, but i'm currently thinking about to what extent it is non-universal. haven't made my mind up yet, maybe someone else will share their thoughts as well. while i was watching, only the "sailing out with a boat and changing the course of the world" comment stood out negatively to me.

saffarinda wrote:Also, does anyone know what general career Dan's Mum has? (Because as interesting as I find philosophy, I do often wonder what careers can come from it).

Not sure if I'm allowed to say what she does, but she's a massage therapist.

[offtopic]Anyone else have Tropical Storm Cindy? I do and it's pouring outside and has been for the past 14 hours. Hopefully the storm won't be too bad. I believe the last tropical storm where I live was Tropical Storm Irene in 2012.

On top of a tropical storm, some guy in Tokyo decided to steal $1200 to go to Disneyland, so that's also great.[/offtopic]

onetruetrash wrote:

saffarinda wrote:Also, does anyone know what general career Dan's Mum has? (Because as interesting as I find philosophy, I do often wonder what careers can come from it).

Not sure if I'm allowed to say what she does, but she's a massage therapist.

[offtopic]Anyone else have Tropical Storm Cindy? I do and it's pouring outside and has been for the past 14 hours. Hopefully the storm won't be too bad. I believe the last tropical storm where I live was Tropical Storm Irene in 2012.

On top of a tropical storm, some guy in Tokyo decided to steal $1200 to go to Disneyland, so that's also great.[/offtopic]

I read that in Our Threadbare Lies but I wasn't sure if it was real despite the rest of the fic following the canon timeline. I'm always impressed by that fic, damn.

Unpopular Opinion: I actually like ISG? I wouldn't want them regularly but once or twice a year is pretty good, I often find them incredibly funny (especially the recent one, less so the older ones). I'd prefer a story time or skit based video, but I still enjoy them. Why does everyone seem to dislike them?

saffarinda wrote:Unpopular Opinion: I actually like ISG? I wouldn't want them regularly but once or twice a year is pretty good, I often find them incredibly funny (especially the recent one, less so the older ones). I'd prefer a story time or skit based video, but I still enjoy them. Why does everyone seem to dislike them?

I quite like ISG too, apart from the last one. I think it's a pretty funy series. I don't want it all the time, but I like overall.

Moving on, can y'all help me find a video? I know I saw it before, I just don't remember where. All I can remember about it is that I'm pretty sure it was episode 2 or 4 of a web series, Phil is running at the start of it, and I believe it was uploaded in 2011 or 2012. Does anyone know which video I'm taking about? I think it only had several thousand views too.

onetruetrash wrote:

saffarinda wrote:Unpopular Opinion: I actually like ISG? I wouldn't want them regularly but once or twice a year is pretty good, I often find them incredibly funny (especially the recent one, less so the older ones). I'd prefer a story time or skit based video, but I still enjoy them. Why does everyone seem to dislike them?

I quite like ISG too, apart from the last one. I think it's a pretty funy series. I don't want it all the time, but I like overall.

Moving on, can y'all help me find a video? I know I saw it before, I just don't remember where. All I can remember about it is that I'm pretty sure it was episode 2 or 4 of a web series, Phil is running at the start of it, and I believe it was uploaded in 2011 or 2012. Does anyone know which video I'm taking about? I think it only had several thousand views too.

It sounds like you mean this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyI5Wqopt1U&t=0s

saffarinda wrote:

onetruetrash wrote:

saffarinda wrote:Unpopular Opinion: I actually like ISG? I wouldn't want them regularly but once or twice a year is pretty good, I often find them incredibly funny (especially the recent one, less so the older ones). I'd prefer a story time or skit based video, but I still enjoy them. Why does everyone seem to dislike them?

I quite like ISG too, apart from the last one. I think it's a pretty funy series. I don't want it all the time, but I like overall.

Moving on, can y'all help me find a video? I know I saw it before, I just don't remember where. All I can remember about it is that I'm pretty sure it was episode 2 or 4 of a web series, Phil is running at the start of it, and I believe it was uploaded in 2011 or 2012. Does anyone know which video I'm taking about? I think it only had several thousand views too.

It sounds like you mean this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyI5Wqopt1U&t=0s

Yep! Thanks!

saffarinda wrote: Unpopular Opinion: I actually like ISG? I wouldn't want them regularly but once or twice a year is pretty good, I often find them incredibly funny (especially the recent one, less so the older ones). I'd prefer a story time or skit based video, but I still enjoy them. Why does everyone seem to dislike them?

I second that!

re the discussion around Dan's video: I've not been an active fandom member for long, and it still confuses me sometimes how critical their content is viewed and how often there seems to be drama (on other platforms like twitter and tumblr) about it afterwards. Like with this video, I watched, laughed and smiled a couple of times, but it didn't mean too much to me. Seeing how in depth you go in discussing it, and how often people seem to be actually upset or disappointed by what he/they put out sometimes really surprises me.
I hope this doesn't come across as me saying I think it's bad - it's just an observation I wanted to share, since I've been thinking about that, and personally just approach their content so differently, I thought that might be interesting to see.

also, as a non-native speaker myself, I also always value when they explain things especially with TV shows or pop culture references, I very often don't get those.

re phil's tweet about shirtless guys and dan's comment indirectly calling phil family: i very very much approve

fondsmiles wrote: re the discussion around Dan's video: I've not been an active fandom member for long, and it still confuses me sometimes how critical their content is viewed and how often there seems to be drama (on other platforms like twitter and tumblr) about it afterwards. Like with this video, I watched, laughed and smiled a couple of times, but it didn't mean too much to me. Seeing how in depth you go in discussing it, and how often people seem to be actually upset or disappointed by what he/they put out sometimes really surprises me.
I hope this doesn't come across as me saying I think it's bad - it's just an observation I wanted to share, since I've been thinking about that, and personally just approach their content so differently, I thought that might be interesting to see.

I've only been a fan for a couple months, so I'm with you, lol - I haven't been part of a community this invested before. Although, getting really passionate/excited about things I like is normal for me, so all the in-depth bants (roll credits!) are lots of fun.

If I had to take a guess, I think one reason their fanbase gets so "into it" is that neither of them produce consistent content on their main channels, which leaves us a bit bored in-between videos, hahaha. And some people (like me) just like going on and on about the things they like.

And this doesn't really apply to IDB, since it seems like folks here have a pretty healthy viewer-entertainer relationship with D&P, but on sites like twitter and tumblr you have a lot of the younger fans who sometimes get too invested in D&P, the content they create, and their lives in general. It seems like they put themselves in this emotionally-dependent position, where what D&P do (or don't do) has more of an impact on them. I think that's where a lot of the "drama" comes from. (And I hope that isn't read as a slight against younger fans! There are definitely older fans who do the same thing, and younger fans who aren't like that. I just remember being a teen myself, it's very easy to get attached to entertainers and the image they portray, then feel confused when they act too human.)

re phil's tweet about shirtless guys and dan's comment indirectly calling phil family[/b]: i very very much approve

same

fondsmiles wrote:re the discussion around Dan's video: I've not been an active fandom member for long, and it still confuses me sometimes how critical their content is viewed and how often there seems to be drama (on other platforms like twitter and tumblr) about it afterwards. Like with this video, I watched, laughed and smiled a couple of times, but it didn't mean too much to me. Seeing how in depth you go in discussing it, and how often people seem to be actually upset or disappointed by what he/they put out sometimes really surprises me.

I can see how if you're not as into something, intense discussion around it seems surprising - but I think that's kind of a universal thing. I'm not into sports, so I would react the same going on a sports forum seeing the extent that people go in depth analyzing athletes and caring about their lives. I'm not into knitting, so going onto a knitting forum and seeing people who spend hours and hours a week learning patterns would cause the same reaction, etc etc.

I think the drama and discussion after a video is a sign of a healthy fandom, too. While it may be a personal annoyance to Dan, if he posted a video and no one really said anything about it... people would just be hand wringing that they weren't popular and the phandom was dying. (Oh, wait, they already are. )

alittledizzy wrote:

fondsmiles wrote:re the discussion around Dan's video: I've not been an active fandom member for long, and it still confuses me sometimes how critical their content is viewed and how often there seems to be drama (on other platforms like twitter and tumblr) about it afterwards. Like with this video, I watched, laughed and smiled a couple of times, but it didn't mean too much to me. Seeing how in depth you go in discussing it, and how often people seem to be actually upset or disappointed by what he/they put out sometimes really surprises me.

I can see how if you're not as into something, intense discussion around it seems surprising - but I think that's kind of a universal thing. I'm not into sports, so I would react the same going on a sports forum seeing the extent that people go in depth analyzing athletes and caring about their lives. I'm not into knitting, so going onto a knitting forum and seeing people who spend hours and hours a week learning patterns would cause the same reaction, etc etc.

I think the drama and discussion after a video is a sign of a healthy fandom, too. While it may be a personal annoyance to Dan, if he posted a video and no one really said anything about it... people would just be hand wringing that they weren't popular and the phandom was dying. (Oh, wait, they already are. )

I agree with this so much. I was (and still am - even after being sent death threats by some fans I pissed off lmao) a MASSIVE My Chem fan. In 2010 when they changed their website to promote Danger Days and nobody knew what was happening shit went DOWN. Like the theories were crazier and crazier, and to me thats healthy?? Fan engagement is encouraged on YouTube so I'd be more concerned by an absence of discussion.

With My Chem they had this TV thing on their website with different 'channels' that played different things - one of them was playing distorted music and had a specific number attached to the 'channel'. Someone realised that the number was the number of points the Taiwanese stock market had changed that day. They saved the music from the TV and analysed it by running it through various music programs to the closing number of the Taiwanese stock market. Trying to make something that was music-like come out of it. (does anyone remember this? It was called the MCR Mindfuck 2010 - I have fond memories of it)

While it was a little bit OTT, I think healthy fandoms do encourage that level of theorising?! Maybe not invading peoples privacy (like posting their address on the internet for everyone to stalk), but definitely conversation and discussion and conspiracy theories. Think back to only a few weeks ago with the Bahamas drama, that DEFINITELY reminds me of what happened in 2010 with MCR.

sparkle wrote: With My Chem they had this TV thing on their website with different 'channels' that played different things - one of them was playing distorted music and had a specific number attached to the 'channel'. Someone realised that the number was the number of points the Taiwanese stock market had changed that day. They saved the music from the TV and analysed it by running it through various music programs to the closing number of the Taiwanese stock market. Trying to make something that was music-like come out of it. (does anyone remember this? It was called the MCR Mindfuck 2010 - I have fond memories of it)

While it was a little bit OTT, I think healthy fandoms do encourage that level of theorising?! Maybe not invading peoples privacy (like posting their address on the internet for everyone to stalk), but definitely conversation and discussion and conspiracy theories. Think back to only a few weeks ago with the Bahamas drama, that DEFINITELY reminds me of what happened in 2010 with MCR.

Oh man, this takes me back to my K-Pop days... I was never part of the MCR fandom (casual listener oops), but we had similar stuff happen in the various K-Pop group fandoms. I wish I could think of a specific anecdote to share, but nothing comes to mind... But yeah, I definitely agree that theorizing is important and healthy for a fandom - it's a sign of interest and engagement. I think that different demographics and different fandoms/communities get engaged in different ways, and in the case of D&P (and MCR, K-Pop groups, etc.) that form of engagement is theorizing and discussing every detail until it's been stripped down to molecular level.

(And of course, lots of shipping too... I remember, for the group I stanned, everyone kind of shipped the guys with each other for fun, but then there were Those Two Guys that everyone was kinda-sorta-legitimately wondering about. Now that I think about it, there are so many parallels to D&P and Those Two Guys, including a "dark" era like 2012, being immediate and intense friends, being weirdly close before they got super famous... wow. I feel like I just had an epiphany and need to sit quietly and process it for a while.)

Phil retweeted this:

000dia000 wrote:Phil retweeted this:

what is this?

snokoplasmic wrote:

000dia000 wrote:Phil retweeted this:

what is this?

Dan retweeted too. I'm guessing it's to raise money for the Grenfell Tower victims who need housing, food, clothing etc. They obviously aren't there bc they left for vidcon last night, so I'm guessing they were just spreading awareness by retweeting (or they may have left a message for them to air, who knows).

It's a livestream donating money for Kensington & Chelsea Foundation which (I think) will go to the Grenfell victims

Deppy did record a quick message which was shown near the start telling people to donate

Their message popped up right at the end too. Phil said Dan would do 1000 sit-ups for every donation, but Dan told him not to promise things that are impossible It was quite fun, loads of makeup, yoga and cake challenges, and some music.

droopy wrote:

sparkle wrote: With My Chem they had this TV thing on their website with different 'channels' that played different things - one of them was playing distorted music and had a specific number attached to the 'channel'. Someone realised that the number was the number of points the Taiwanese stock market had changed that day. They saved the music from the TV and analysed it by running it through various music programs to the closing number of the Taiwanese stock market. Trying to make something that was music-like come out of it. (does anyone remember this? It was called the MCR Mindfuck 2010 - I have fond memories of it)

While it was a little bit OTT, I think healthy fandoms do encourage that level of theorising?! Maybe not invading peoples privacy (like posting their address on the internet for everyone to stalk), but definitely conversation and discussion and conspiracy theories. Think back to only a few weeks ago with the Bahamas drama, that DEFINITELY reminds me of what happened in 2010 with MCR.

Oh man, this takes me back to my K-Pop days... I was never part of the MCR fandom (casual listener oops), but we had similar stuff happen in the various K-Pop group fandoms. I wish I could think of a specific anecdote to share, but nothing comes to mind... But yeah, I definitely agree that theorizing is important and healthy for a fandom - it's a sign of interest and engagement. I think that different demographics and different fandoms/communities get engaged in different ways, and in the case of D&P (and MCR, K-Pop groups, etc.) that form of engagement is theorizing and discussing every detail until it's been stripped down to molecular level.

(And of course, lots of shipping too... I remember, for the group I stanned, everyone kind of shipped the guys with each other for fun, but then there were Those Two Guys that everyone was kinda-sorta-legitimately wondering about. Now that I think about it, there are so many parallels to D&P and Those Two Guys, including a "dark" era like 2012, being immediate and intense friends, being weirdly close before they got super famous... wow. I feel like I just had an epiphany and need to sit quietly and process it for a while.)

So has anything been factually determined about Those Two Guys relationship? I don't know who you're talking about but anything that parallels deppy is interesting to me!

sparkle wrote:

alittledizzy wrote:

fondsmiles wrote:re the discussion around Dan's video: I've not been an active fandom member for long, and it still confuses me sometimes how critical their content is viewed and how often there seems to be drama (on other platforms like twitter and tumblr) about it afterwards. Like with this video, I watched, laughed and smiled a couple of times, but it didn't mean too much to me. Seeing how in depth you go in discussing it, and how often people seem to be actually upset or disappointed by what he/they put out sometimes really surprises me.

I can see how if you're not as into something, intense discussion around it seems surprising - but I think that's kind of a universal thing. I'm not into sports, so I would react the same going on a sports forum seeing the extent that people go in depth analyzing athletes and caring about their lives. I'm not into knitting, so going onto a knitting forum and seeing people who spend hours and hours a week learning patterns would cause the same reaction, etc etc.

I think the drama and discussion after a video is a sign of a healthy fandom, too. While it may be a personal annoyance to Dan, if he posted a video and no one really said anything about it... people would just be hand wringing that they weren't popular and the phandom was dying. (Oh, wait, they already are. )

I agree with this so much. I was (and still am - even after being sent death threats by some fans I pissed off lmao) a MASSIVE My Chem fan. In 2010 when they changed their website to promote Danger Days and nobody knew what was happening shit went DOWN. Like the theories were crazier and crazier, and to me thats healthy?? Fan engagement is encouraged on YouTube so I'd be more concerned by an absence of discussion.

wow, this is really interesting to see your guys' perspective on this. I personally really don't feel the same way, even though I am also in other youtube fandoms (where things are a bit different), and am also very invested in deppy as people (and maybe sometimes too much in their private lives).
while I do agree that discussion of the content and in-depth ( ) conversations are crucial to a fandom, I personally can't see how drama and serious theorising (in the sense that it actually upsets and affects people emotionally, and they depend on the outcome of those theories in their emotions) are crucial to a healthy fandom though. I am not used to this from other fandoms, and I've always viewed it as kind of toxic, because to me it's always only produced negative emotions in people.
do you have different perceptions of that? where do you draw the line to unhealthy fandom behaviour, then?
(this kind of stuff is really interesting to me)

fondsmiles wrote: wow, this is really interesting to see your guys' perspective on this. I personally really don't feel the same way, even though I am also in other youtube fandoms (where things are a bit different), and am also very invested in deppy as people (and maybe sometimes too much in their private lives).
while I do agree that discussion of the content and in-depth ( ) conversations are crucial to a fandom, I personally can't see how drama and serious theorising (in the sense that it actually upsets and affects people emotionally, and they depend on the outcome of those theories in their emotions) are crucial to a healthy fandom though. I am not used to this from other fandoms, and I've always viewed it as kind of toxic, because to me it's always only produced negative emotions in people.
do you have different perceptions of that? where do you draw the line to unhealthy fandom behaviour, then?
(this kind of stuff is really interesting to me)

For me, I think its healthy as long as your life isn't affected. If it is making you happy and is fun then go for it, but if you become withdrawn/living through fandoms then you have a problem that is deeper than being a superfan. Like if Phan was confirmed as real tomorrow I'd be super happy (that I was right about it), but I don't care enough to base my happiness on it. I used to, and that was because I had issues I hadn't dealt with.

I also draw a very bold line at internet theorising when it comes into real life. I love deppy don't get me wrong, but I'm not going to try and track them down. I'm not going to ask them anything personal in public, I felt REALLY sick when I saw photos of Dans brother (by accident). I think the people who sent Dan ask after ask about Phan were unhealthy, because it clearly had massive negative impacts. Does this make any sense? I think theres a clear line - and I think that some things cross it. Like that fan who worked out where they lived and had her dad take her there?? Too far. You're now a stalker.

Also with the comparisons to other ships, the two that were big with My Chem fans were Frerard and GerardxBert (Which i don't even know if that has a ship name omg fake fan). I find it interesting comparing deppy to these two. Frerard made out on stage, they sat on each others laps and acted cute and couply, but I genuinely believe that AT MOST they were just two guys on tour, and I think most of it was a performance. (this was circa 2004, and I think they wanted to weed out homophobes from their audience, and I genuinely think thats confirmed). Even though they made out, which if deppy did it it would be 100% Phan confirmed to EVERYONE, they still came across as less of a couple than deppy do. Whereas GerardxBert again, weren't as couply as Frerard (Still more so than deppy), but I believe that was an actual relationship because when that 'ended' Bert ROASTED Gerard. For years afterwards. And GerardxBert reminds me more of deppy than Frerard does, even though Frerard made out (Which would be Phan confirmed to even the most anti-Phan people).

I hope that makes sense

sparkle wrote:

fondsmiles wrote: wow, this is really interesting to see your guys' perspective on this. I personally really don't feel the same way, even though I am also in other youtube fandoms (where things are a bit different), and am also very invested in deppy as people (and maybe sometimes too much in their private lives).
while I do agree that discussion of the content and in-depth ( ) conversations are crucial to a fandom, I personally can't see how drama and serious theorising (in the sense that it actually upsets and affects people emotionally, and they depend on the outcome of those theories in their emotions) are crucial to a healthy fandom though. I am not used to this from other fandoms, and I've always viewed it as kind of toxic, because to me it's always only produced negative emotions in people.
do you have different perceptions of that? where do you draw the line to unhealthy fandom behaviour, then?
(this kind of stuff is really interesting to me)

For me, I think its healthy as long as your life isn't affected. If it is making you happy and is fun then go for it, but if you become withdrawn/living through fandoms then you have a problem that is deeper than being a superfan. Like if Phan was confirmed as real tomorrow I'd be super happy (that I was right about it), but I don't care enough to base my happiness on it. I used to, and that was because I had issues I hadn't dealt with.

I also draw a very bold line at internet theorising when it comes into real life. I love deppy don't get me wrong, but I'm not going to try and track them down. I'm not going to ask them anything personal in public, I felt REALLY sick when I saw photos of Dans brother (by accident). I think the people who sent Dan ask after ask about Phan were unhealthy, because it clearly had massive negative impacts. Does this make any sense? I think theres a clear line - and I think that some things cross it. Like that fan who worked out where they lived and had her dad take her there?? Too far. You're now a stalker.

Also with the comparisons to other ships, the two that were big with My Chem fans were Frerard and GerardxBert (Which i don't even know if that has a ship name omg fake fan). I find it interesting comparing deppy to these two. Frerard made out on stage, they sat on each others laps and acted cute and couply, but I genuinely believe that AT MOST they were just two guys on tour, and I think most of it was a performance. (this was circa 2004, and I think they wanted to weed out homophobes from their audience, and I genuinely think thats confirmed). Even though they made out, which if deppy did it it would be 100% Phan confirmed to EVERYONE, they still came across as less of a couple than deppy do. Whereas GerardxBert again, weren't as couply as Frerard (Still more so than deppy), but I believe that was an actual relationship because when that 'ended' Bert ROASTED Gerard. For years afterwards. And GerardxBert reminds me more of deppy than Frerard does, even though Frerard made out (Which would be Phan confirmed to even the most anti-Phan people).

I hope that makes sense

Agree with this so much. I get so uncomfortable when I see pictures people have taken of Dan and Phil when they're unaware. Like that picture of them asleep on the airplane... I just- no?? When is it okay to take creep pictures of people on airplanes?!

I think as long as you don't get so involved that you find yourself entitled to intimate facts regarding their lives. Dan and Phil have the right to give and share as much as they wish, and we don't have the right to demand more.

Appa wrote:It's a livestream donating money for Kensington & Chelsea Foundation which (I think) will go to the Grenfell victims

Deppy did record a quick message which was shown near the start telling people to donate

Link to deppy vid for anyone who missed the livestream.