User blog comment:EtherBot/Art and Entertainment/@comment-5101683-20190206035528/@comment-5101683-20191105031224

Thank you for replying.

To explain why I wrote the last comment, I need to start with the second one. What you wrote really spoke to me because it felt like you were sad about the limitations of this site. I thought that this would make other people feel sad, and they would start talking about the avant-garde stories they had seen, and I wanted to bring up Coraline Ripoff. It still confuses me that I'm the only person who did that.

At that time, I thought that Coraline Ripoff was written like that on purpose, like The Not Empty Dark. But when I looked into Coraline Ripoff, I realized the person who wrote it didn't seem lucid. I looked at the comment I had written, calling the writer "either a genius or insane", and it seemed really insensitive with that in mind. I didn't want to edit the comment because, as I had mentioned before, I thought my writing it had spoiled people's reactions to what you'd written, and it felt disingenuous to "fix" the comment so long after the fact. So instead, I castigated myself for that comment, because I thought everyone else was just being nice about the severe faux pas I'd committed. I ended the comment with "I fixed it" because this was my alternative to editing the comment and hiding my mistake. I wanted to show people the kind of person I was. I thought (erroneously again) that it would make people more comfortable with sharing their thoughts about both this blog post and the insensitivity of my comment.

Of course, I feel better now because we both agree about the story. Maybe this post will change your mind too, but now I know that my being in awe of the story, instead of treating it banally like NedWolfkin in the link, wasn't because of some deep-held blindness.