<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<oembed>
 <version>1.0</version>
 <type>link</type>
 <provider_name>Rainbow Dash Network</provider_name>
 <provider_url>http://rainbowdash.net/</provider_url>
 <title>Narwhal (narwhal)'s status on Sunday, 14-Jun-15 14:48:47 UTC</title>
 <author_name>Narwhal (narwhal)</author_name>
 <author_url>http://rainbowdash.net/narwhal</author_url>
 <url>http://rainbowdash.net/notice/3941214</url>
 <html>@&lt;span class=&quot;vcard&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://rainbowdash.net/user/29796&quot; class=&quot;url&quot; title=&quot;Griffin&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fn nickname mention&quot;&gt;vcgriffin&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt; You're right, there's definitely a clear conflict of interests in terms of how we define the term, which is probably because even the term &amp;quot;brony&amp;quot; is already incredibly connotative. I don't align with the prospect of &amp;quot;brony culture&amp;quot; as an extension of the term &amp;quot;brony&amp;quot;, which as I discussed in my previous post is really more of a contrived identity complex than an actual method of engagement with media. I certainly agree with your sandpit analogy too, e100 was very clearly submissive to that prospect of &amp;quot;brony culture&amp;quot;, which has sort of become an entirely separate mentality of viewing the show. @&lt;span class=&quot;vcard&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://rainbowdash.net/user/76&quot; class=&quot;url&quot; title=&quot;TOP BUB&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fn nickname mention&quot;&gt;thelastgherkin&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt; made a great post here &lt;a href=&quot;http://rainbowdash.net/notice/3940825&quot; title=&quot;http://rainbowdash.net/notice/3940825&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow external&quot;&gt;http://rainbowdash.net/notice/3940825&lt;/a&gt; about demographic that I think really rings true for this conversation.</html>
</oembed>
