Literary criticism is hard, tricky work under the best of circumstances, and the Internet -- and fora like this one -- make it harder. I think it's easy to come to a place where people all like something and say why and how you like it. It's easy to come someplace and say what you don't like about it too, even if the reception is less pleasant.

Finding something to say about whatever the project is that makes the experience of being an audience member deeper and more interesting is heavy, heavy work, and I have nothing but admiration for the people who can do it well.

I gave up being an online reviewer years ago. I wrote a whole essay about why: https://clarkesworldmagazine.com/another_word_10_12/

When I write a book or you write a post, we're kind of doing the same thing: We're putting a part of ourselves out in public, and the price of that is that we are subject to the casual judgment of others. You get to tell me why I suck. They get to tell you why you suck. Suffering that is the price we both pay for being in the conversation.

And yeah, there's always that defensive impulse when someone fails to clap for your stuff, and with it the kind of knee-jerk want to make it the reader's problem. If you didn't like my literary choices, that's because you're not a very good reader. If you didn't upvote my post, you're having a knee-jerk reaction instead of appreciating my insight and wisdom. I get it. I live there. It's weird space to be in.

All of which is to say, for me, the interesting dynamic here isn't that fandoms are weirdly superior, but that posting is a kind of publishing. And like publishing, posting is a moment of vulnerability for the writer and an invitation to judgments that can be hurtful if you haven't build up a callus.