User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-6032121-20191013225604

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-6032121-20191013225604 User:Amorkuz:

While the specific M&W definition of fanfiction is not necessary to a T:NO FANFIC argument, a similar "layman's definition" of fanfiction is, because by a legal definition of fanfiction (inasmuch as there is such a thing), commercially-licensed material such as the Wylder crossovers wouldn't be fanfiction. My point wasn't specifically about M&W, but rather about the sheer logic of the situation.

Once more, I apologize for answering arguments that are not yours, but would you kindly tell us what your actual argument is, rather than leave us to make guesses and then correct us when they miss the mark? If not to push an argument based on the "anything published personally on the Internet is fanfic" idea, why is the self-published nature of the short stories relevant? What are you arguing for? A debate cannot be had with anything resembling efficiency if one of the parties just gives examples but refuses to explain what point they're meant to be illustrating.