coaltide | The Coal Game

Entry tags:

2021

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

yuletide |

yuletide_admin | Writing Post
2021 Collection | 2021 App (bonus + challenges) | Letter Post

Flat / Recent | Top-Level (Last) | FAQ | Search

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

SC

After posting the above comment I was immediately called away for many hours. Anyway, my question. I matched on Worldbuilding. The idea I've been working on so far has an original-character narrator who is basically on a date with an original character woman. The relationship between them is not the focus of the story, but it's pretty clear they're on a date. If it matters, I don't specify the gender of the narrator, but in my head he's a man. I was just rereading my assignment and noticed my recip has a DNW of unrequested relationships. Am I brushing up against this DNW? I could think of some way to get the narrator where he needs to be without the date, but for what I've been writing, it really is the easiest way, and the thing that best sets up some later stuff in the fic.

It might be worth asking through the mods whether the DNW was meant to apply to OCs. I think a lot of people DNW unrequested relationships but are only thinking of relationships with/among canon characters, and wouldn't mind a relationship between OCs, but may not have thought to mention it as an exception in their signup.

I requested Worldbuilding, and my DNWs include unrequested relationships between canon characters, so an OC on a date with another OC would be fine. If your recip's DNWs aren't so explicit, email the mods to ask if this scenario would be all right. (Or write a non-romantic date, like co-workers going out for lunch? Or people just being friends? If that works for your story?)

We need a rule that "unrequested ships" is an invalid DNW unless you request at least two characters and mention at least one ship in your signups (letter doesn't count!) I've seen too many signups this year with an "unrequested ships" dnw and no requested ships or characters. If you aren't requesting any ships, DNW shipfic instead and save your writer the angst.

Huh. I always use the same DNWs across all my fandoms. I request ships in some fandoms, but in others I don't. I just assumed that if there was a fandom where I wasn't requesting any ship, "DNW: unrequested ships" would obviously "mean DNW: shipfic" for that fandom, just like "DNW: unrequeted AUs" would mean "DNW: AU" for any fandom where I didn't request an AU. Do I need to rephrase the same DNW for each fandom depending on whether I requested a ship or not?

DC

No. If you don't request any ships, then "DNW: unrequested ships" still works, it just means that all ships are unrequested.

I don't know what coalie above is on about.

sc Honestly I generally dislike signups that obviously c+p the same DNWs in all fandoms. Like if it's a short list of fairly specific things - no noncon, no underage, no scat - that's fine, but if it's an extensive list or it has some fairly broad things in it, it's reasonably likely that there's at least one of them that will not mesh super well with either the fandom or the requests. Like the multiple questions that have come up in coal already this year about dubcon/noncon DNWs for ships with canon dubcon.

And if the DNWs are obviously copy-pasted, you're left wondering if the requester has even thought about how they actually apply to that request, or if they've just been copy-pasting without re-reading for years. Doesn't mean you have to drop a DNW, but you should think about how it would be interpreted to someone who is only reading that fandom's prompts and if it would help to clarify.

(Also, this is maybe just me, but long, obviously c+p DNWs feel like you're expecting your writer to contort themselves to fit your DNWs to your prompts, but you couldn't be bothered to make any attempt to put in even a minor bit of thought about that yourself?)

And for DNWs like "unrequested X", I dislike them particularly, because DNWs are enforceable, letters aren't for a reason - because letters can be edited. And if you have an "unrequested X" DNW for something that isn't mentioned elsewhere in the signup, you are then forced to cross-reference to a letter that might change after you start writing! Like, they DNW unrequested AUs, you check the letter, they mention they want modern AUs, you write the story, you check back and they've added "but not for this fandom" to the letter, suddenly you've written a DNW violation? That's not how that should work.

Something like DNW "unrequested X" is okay for a general DNW list at the top of your letter but for enforceable, fandom-specific signup DNWs it would work a lot better to say "DNW any ship except X/Y" or "DNW any AU except Z in this fandom", so the DNWs are complete in themselves. And if you really don't want any at all, you don't need the "except". If not that, you should at least put the exceptions in the signup, not the letter.

+1000
“DNW: Unrequested X” is so annoying

You're not SC.

No i meant cyrt, sorry!

If you're this paranoid, just take a screendump of the letter, write your fic and never check back to the actual letter.

Lol what

So what you're saying is those kind of DNWs aren't actually enforceable as written! We agree.

(i have dealt with a letter that wanted h/c and had a bunch of H things that were "dnw for requested pairings, but likes generally" and kept adding pairings to the letter well into the writing period, so while my example was simplified it's not hypothetical.)

CYRT

I see what you're saying if someone is adding to their letter, although the problem wouldn't have occurred to me since I list my requested pairings in my signup. I try to put everything important in my signups, so it's not like I can suddenly un-request something later by changing my letter. And I have a very short list of DNWs, which are all pretty straightforward and apply to all my fandoms, or have a note to explain them if they don't.

To me I guess it's mainly a phrasing preference. A request for A/B with a DNW for unrequested pairings sounds better and more neutral to me than "DNW: any pairing except A/B."

SC

To be clear, I understand that "DNW: any pairing except A/B" is also neutral! I just feel like I sound judgy if I say it that way.

If you're putting your ok pairings in the letter you're not who I'm mad at! That's fine. If you DNW unrequested and not requesting anything I'd still really prefer that said outright in the signup though - otherwise I'm left wondering if there was supposed to be something requested.

I get not wanting to put specific pairings in your DNW because of how it sounds, but as a generally pairing-agnostic person "unrequested pairings" feels like you're saying "how dare you expose me to any of those *other* pairings" whereas "dnw anything but x/y" feels like you're saying "this is what I want in this specific exchange, please!"

Also at this point "unrequested pairings" has more wanky history-at least in yuletide, since your small-fandom ship prefs are unlikely to have a ship war. I can see how it might feel different if you're requesting, like, reylo. I only do small fandoms in exchanges so that doesn't come up.

...and I meant to say 'in the signup' not 'in the letter's in that first sentence.

"unrequested pairings" feels like you're saying "how dare you expose me to any of those *other* pairings" whereas "dnw anything but x/y" feels like you're saying "this is what I want in this specific exchange, please!"

Hah, that must be our problem. I was thinking the exact opposite! To me "DNW anything but x/y" feels like "everything besides x/y is bad," whereas "DNW: unrequested pairings" feels like "I request different things depending on the exchange or my mood, but for this exchange these are the things I'm requesting."

Also at this point "unrequested pairings" has more wanky history

Does it? Yuletide is almost the only exchange I do, and I'm not in any fandoms with ship wars as far as I know, but I haven't heard anything about "unrequested pairings" wank. I usually see "DNW: unrequested pairings" suggested as a safe, neutral DNW when someone is asking how to, for instance, DNW het or slash without being wanky.

There have been several cases (in other exchanges mostly) where people have DNW'd "unrequested pairings" and then ask for an eph because, for example, the fic mentioned a character's parents having been together. Plus multiple times on every coal dnw thread where someone runs into it in a way that makes them need to ask the mods wtf the recip actually meant. And people asking how to word it in a away that their writer will know that, idk, background canon pairings are okay.

Like I'm sure 90% of the people who use it are fine, but I only encounter it when it goes bad (or in my match letters, at which point I roll my eyes and make a note not to mention that parents exist.) So it definitely doesn't read as the wank-free option anymore.

If you want to DNW slash or het just do that, just don't say it gives you seizures. If you want to DNW one specific pairing do that, just don't talk about how it's gross. If you don't want ship fic focused on anyone else, but background pairings, mention of oc past loves, or or gen with canon pairings is fine, say that! If you really will be triggered by a reminder that anyone other than your OTP has ever dated, say that. You writer will thank you, and won't have to guess which of those you meant.

Ah, okay. I was aware of some of that. I do state in my DNWs that I'm fine with parents and other OC pairings, among other things. (I'm trying to avoid repeating my exact phrasing here since it might be de-anoning, but it's detailed enough that I don't think anyone would be confused about what I mean.) I get your point, though; in fact I was one of the people upthread who suggested that OP should ask the mods about the DNW, because I assume most people are fine with background OC pairings, but some may not realize they need to say so.

Yes, but Aurae is a known troll, and, much like Spiders Georg, should not be counted.

Re: DNW Questions

(Anonymous) - 2021-11-09 04:31 (UTC) - Expand

but as a generally pairing-agnostic person "unrequested pairings" feels like you're saying "how dare you expose me to any of those other pairings" whereas "dnw anything but x/y" feels like you're saying "this is what I want in this specific exchange, please!"

I'm also a generally pairing agnostic person and I feel the exact opposite way. "No unrequested pairing" feels like "I just want what I specifically ask for, which is one plain cheese pizza for Kevin McAllister."

but "dnw anything but x/y" feels like "don't waste my time with anything other than my OTP, which I feel entitled to demand even though yuletide is a character matching exchange not a ship matching exchange"

My DNW of unrequested ships between canon characters comes from being constantly blindsided by noncanon juggernauts that frequently appeared as background pairings in stories. I have a general copy-pasted DNW list, but in the text of my signup I will talk about pairings that I'm okay with in the background. So like, I might request A and B, and say I ship A/B but gen is fine, and other ships I'm okay with are C/D and C/E. Or I might request gen or worldbuilding (I've requested worldbuilding this year for one fandom) and say canon relationships and A/B are fine but I don't want focus on them.

I agree that this kind of thing needs to be in the signup, not just the letter, though! (Like, EVERYTHING that is enforceable should be in the letter, not just DNWs but for Yuletide the permission to treat the character matching as OR, if you are okay with just one character appearing. This is a moot point now but now that requests are visible in the app I've been noticing a lot of people just putting DNWs and character matching opt-outs in letters, which, argh, I don't want to touch those just in case.)

My DNW of unrequested ships between canon characters comes from being constantly blindsided by noncanon juggernauts that frequently appeared as background pairings in stories

This is how Clint/Coulson single-handedly ruined my MCU fandom experience ten-ish years ago.

My antipathy for the ship became so strong that it spread to all noncanon background ships, and then to second string romances in original fiction (which I fought back via a couple years of only reading nonfiction).

Clint/Coulson is that bitch who lives in a freaking cracker factory.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only