coaltide | And another one!

Entry tags:

2023

And another one!

I see my nemesis getting a fic that I love
And I'm like, "Fuck you"
I guess my 10k letter wasn't enough
I'm like, "Fuck you and fuck morbane, too"
Said, "If I was a long commenter, they woulda gamed for me"
Ha, now ain't that some shit?
(Ain't that some shit?)
And although there's pain in my chest
I still comment it's the best
And runs to coal to shout "Fuck you"

Nominations: Monday 18 to Thursday 28 September (Coordination | Evidence Post)
Sign-ups: Friday 13 to Saturday 21 October (NYR | Promo Post)
Assignments Out: Monday 23 October (may be earlier)
Default Deadline: Monday 11 December
Assignment Deadline: Monday 18 December
Main Collection Opens: Monday 25 December
Madness Opens: Tuesday 26 December
Author Reveals: Monday 1 January

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

yuletide |

yuletide_admin | App
2023 Collection | Tagset

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

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

+1. The asshole who linked her was an asshole, but other than that? Not really, no.

+2 The claims of bullying drive me nuts; if someone linked flipflop-diva or karreina_rune to BFE and they deleted, would talk suddenly switch to how they were bullied? The person who linked her was an absolute asshole and I feel sorry for how she was hurt, but there were reasons she was complained about as much as she was:

1. she wrote very bad fic, often outright incomprehensible, so if you were in it for the gift, out of luck if you got her.

2. she wrote short comments that all sounded alike and weren't the long, effusive BFE-preffered style. She didn't copy-paste her comments, but there was a reason people thought she did. So if you were in it for the comments, out of luck.

3. her likes and dnws both didn't fit BFE's general likes and often did not go well with the ships she requested (e.g., soft handholding for a torturer/victim ship), so she could be hard to write for.

4. she would request every ship and character in a fandom (and probably offered as widely) so she was hard to avoid, leading to people dropping fandoms. I think it's this one in particular that was the root cause of much of the complaining. Had she been

It really is too bad no one took her aside, or if someone did it didn't take, and I'm sorry she felt the need to delete her account. But #4 combined with the previous three made her a bad participant.

1 and 2 might go hand in hand since writing anything (or anything in English?) is clearly a struggle. Uncharitable, but if it looked like someone was using some kind of c&p commenting system for that reason I’d be all the more frustrated that they thought their fics were good enough for gifts, even if the commenting could be more or less sincere.

The comments weren't copied and pasted, though. Some nonnies were acting like spoiled brats because they weren't the long, effusive comments they felt entitled to.

+1

The comments were short and similar, but they were written new for each work and likely sincere.

The comments were extremely similar and her author reply comments were literally copy/paste, which is how people confirmed ID of some of her DNW violations before reveal, so it was easy to conflate them.

That's still not even jaywalking. It's someone saying thank you.

I didn't say it was jaywalking. It's just disingenuous to pretend that there's not a very clear reason why people misremember that she copy/pasted comments.

They were bitter entitled assholes. We went over that already.

They were notably shit comments from an all-round shit author/recip/participant, no need to whitewash it this hard, Huck Finn

A short, cheerful, generic comment is not notably shit.

You're a frog graphic enjoyer, aren't you?

What on earth does that mean?

Someone used to gift cheerful, generic frog graphics to everyone in fandomstocking.

Everyone fucking hated them and thought they were total shit. They were the fandom equivalent of your boss handing everyone on your team the same expired cocoa packet stapled through the middle to a piece of paper with generic holiday greetings on it.

So were LK's comments.

Thanks for the explanation!

Unwanted generic graphics don't seem remotely analogous to simple thank yous.

People don't tend to want recip comments that are so absolutely generic they could apply to any fic in an exchange, either. Like was said before, LK's could, and that's part of why people misremember them as being copy-pasted.

+1

Adding to that list, she wrote a couple of things that read like spitefic. Specifically, I recall two instances where her recipient requested m/m and DNW'd a het pairing, and she wrote them gen where the characters spent a lot of time talking and thinking about the other half of the DNW'd pairing.

But #4 was definitely the big one. She signed up for every exchange, requested a lot of popular fandoms, and would request (and likely offer) every single thing within those fandoms. This made it difficult for people who specifically liked rarely written characters and ships to match with each other instead of her, caused the mismatch you mentioned where she only requested fluff but signed up with every single ship including the ones it'd be tough to write fluff for, and made it impossible to avoid her without dropping the fandom entirely. I know a few participants who would drop fandoms that she signed up with, and some that would even delete their entire signup rather than get her as their writer/recip if they had no other fandoms to add.

Whoever linked her to FFA really sucks, and I wish someone had spoken to her constructively instead, but she did ruin exchanges for a lot of people and many of those people frequent FFA. She got a lot of complaints because she was way more prolific than similar participants who only did a handful of exchanges or whose requests were easier to avoid, not because FFA joined forces to bully her out of the hobby.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

And another one!

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail

Re: fishspeakers anonfail