coalcube: (Default)
coalie ([personal profile] coalcube) wrote in [community profile] coaltide2021-11-03 07:31 pm
Entry tags:

The Coal Game

We're scrolling
And watching coalies make errors
The most pathetical errors!
We're watching experienced coalies
Who stayed up all night tracking a source in its original Latin
Up, writin'
And writin' bad!

Default deadline: Sat 11 Dec
Assignment deadline: Sat 18 Dec
Reveals: Sat 25 Dec


Mini-Challenges:
Yuleporn | Make the Yuletide Gay | Jewltide | Three Turtle Doves
YuleBuilding | Two for One | Crueltide | Yuletunes | Yule Be First
YuleSwaps | IF | Wrapping Paper | Yumadrin | MultiLingYule
....and a Partridge in a Pear Tree!

Yuletide Discord for Hippos & Exchanges After Dark Discords for Namespace drama 18+ discussion. Google Group for PHs.

[community profile] yuletide | [community profile] yuletide_admin | Writing Post
2021 Collection | 2021 App (bonus + challenges) | Letter Post

Re: Hmm

(Anonymous) 2021-11-06 07:12 pm (UTC)(link)
As a gen writer, there are times when I would love to offer both lead characters in my fandoms, but I end up offering only one lead and a side character (who is not usually shipped with that lead) to make it less likely I will match to someone who just wants shippy fic. It means that I don't get to offer everyone I want to write, and it also means I'm less matchable in the fandom. Plus it doesn't guarantee I won't get a ship request, although at least I'm not offering both characters of the most popular ships.

I like the idea of matching on "only want shippy fic," "only want gen fic," or "open to both." Officially, Yuletide is "open to both" -- I can request gen, but ODAO means I won't necessarily get it -- but matching on ship vs. gen preference might genuinely make things easier for a lot of participants.

Re: Hmm

(Anonymous) 2021-11-06 07:26 pm (UTC)(link)
+1 million

Re: Hmm

(Anonymous) 2021-11-06 07:42 pm (UTC)(link)
As someone very opposed to relationship matching, allowing a choice between "shippy, gen, both" would be totally fine and not exchange ruining imo

Re: Hmm

(Anonymous) 2021-11-06 07:53 pm (UTC)(link)
+1

Re: Hmm

(Anonymous) 2021-11-07 04:06 am (UTC)(link)
+1

That would also avoid the logistical tagset issues, since it would only be adding three tags total.