Then Koschei_B is actually fine, because they often comment a few months later. Or apparently intend to.
I find them frustrating because the combination of signing up to everything, only requesting a tiny set of canons that are generally hard to consume, and being slow to comment is a combination that makes them extra work for me as a moderator. They are doing nothing morally wrong, I'd take them over someone acting in bad faith any day, and what's hard for me to moderate will be different to what's hard for another moderator. It is pure luck that their canons are not popular, and that is not their fault.
They'd be a lot easier to manage as a participant if they commented promptly, because people would be more willing to consume canons for them. I would also deeply appreciate primers and links to their canons because the fact of the matter is people HAVE to pick up their canons to create for them, because people who know their canons already can't keep up and have no interest in doing so.
I can see myself saying something like "I'm sorry, but for ^reasons above^ I need to ask you not to participate, as I don't think I can guarantee you a gift." Because there's nothing that requires a mod to allow anyone to sign up; they simply have to deal with the consequences of their choices. Several people would probably call me an asshole and choose not to deal with me if I did that, which is also fair enough.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
"intend to" doesn't pass the good faith sniff test for me, though. For all we know every noncommenter out there also always "intends to" comment and just doesn't manage to unless it's require-or-ban. We can only judge them by what they actually do.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
I sort of believe they mean to. But as you say, actions, and they frequently get so behind they stop trying to keep up, or that's my impression. 14/19 of the gifts on their most recent gifts page have comments (one is still a mystery work).
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
If it was 14/19 and he was just a few weeks behind, I don't think he'd be making anyone's noncommenter/annoyed list no matter how many exchanges he did or pinch hit lists he turned up on. But it's not the case.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
First two pages, 38 gifts down to fkn September. (Give or take, a few are unrevealed, including a FFFX one...)
Cumulative word count: A whooping 49107 words! Assuming no typos on my part.
Recip has commented on FIVE of them, and every single comment is about three short lines long. (Which is not something I would bitch about in any other context, but I will bitch about it here.)
Screw this person and whatever their excuses might be. No hate against them personally but they're going on my DNM list out of sheer principle.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
They might not be doing it in bad faith but it still sucks and is a very discourteous way to approach exchanges. Past a certain point you have to deal with people based on actions, not intent.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
Is thedevilchicken still a sporadic commenter? I remember for a while there they had 10+ gifts without comments but they were signing up/running exchanges left and right.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
Looks like most of their gifts on their current gifts page have comments (generally with an apology for lateness, but then a long comment). I have a lot LOT more time for them than Koschei_B even though it's a similar situation of running things while falling behind on comments; Koschei_B was coming up with new flash exchanges every month for a while, and always thinking of new things to run, whereas thedevilchicken was coming back to run new rounds of things they'd run before and didn't want to let people down about.
I wouldn't recommend you write for them if a prompt comment is very important to you, but it seems likely you'd get a comment within a couple of months.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
"Months later" is not great tbh. I understand everything you're saying, but they have OVER TWO DOZEN GIFTS going back to late November (that's when I stopped looking) and they commented on... one, I think? Many of those gifts are very short but a few are in the 1-5k range. Come on... (them, not you)
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
It’s not officially extended yet, though? There’s currently until the end of the 25th for someone to claim it, and if it’s not, the opening will be delayed. (Not saying it won’t be delayed, but am saying it isn’t currently)
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
Looking through Soulmates Exchange posts and some BFE, they went out post-deadline (January 20, PH 19). As of the BFE Pinch Hit post on February 13 (12 PM UTC) only PH 15 was unclaimed. Then there was a brief period where all pinch hits were claimed, but as of February 14 4:55 PM (CST? That's the time the post was made and they list deadlines in CST), PH 19 was back.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
Someone else just picked up the hit. It would be funny if they dropped it. You know, this time. The current time. The time that's right now, not the last time it happened. The poison for Kuzco.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-06 11:04 pm (UTC)(link)That's too much.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-06 11:26 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-06 11:33 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 12:24 am (UTC)(link)I find them frustrating because the combination of signing up to everything, only requesting a tiny set of canons that are generally hard to consume, and being slow to comment is a combination that makes them extra work for me as a moderator. They are doing nothing morally wrong, I'd take them over someone acting in bad faith any day, and what's hard for me to moderate will be different to what's hard for another moderator. It is pure luck that their canons are not popular, and that is not their fault.
They'd be a lot easier to manage as a participant if they commented promptly, because people would be more willing to consume canons for them. I would also deeply appreciate primers and links to their canons because the fact of the matter is people HAVE to pick up their canons to create for them, because people who know their canons already can't keep up and have no interest in doing so.
I can see myself saying something like "I'm sorry, but for ^reasons above^ I need to ask you not to participate, as I don't think I can guarantee you a gift." Because there's nothing that requires a mod to allow anyone to sign up; they simply have to deal with the consequences of their choices. Several people would probably call me an asshole and choose not to deal with me if I did that, which is also fair enough.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 12:29 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 12:46 am (UTC)(link)I sort of believe they mean to. But as you say, actions, and they frequently get so behind they stop trying to keep up, or that's my impression. 14/19 of the gifts on their most recent gifts page have comments (one is still a mystery work).
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 01:49 am (UTC)(link)Sorry, that should be 14/19 do not have comments. Very different!
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 02:02 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 09:51 am (UTC)(link)First two pages, 38 gifts down to fkn September. (Give or take, a few are unrevealed, including a FFFX one...)
Cumulative word count: A whooping 49107 words! Assuming no typos on my part.
Recip has commented on FIVE of them, and every single comment is about three short lines long. (Which is not something I would bitch about in any other context, but I will bitch about it here.)
Screw this person and whatever their excuses might be. No hate against them personally but they're going on my DNM list out of sheer principle.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 09:27 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 11:48 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 09:54 am (UTC)(link)They might not be doing it in bad faith but it still sucks and is a very discourteous way to approach exchanges. Past a certain point you have to deal with people based on actions, not intent.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 03:37 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 07:37 pm (UTC)(link)I wouldn't recommend you write for them if a prompt comment is very important to you, but it seems likely you'd get a comment within a couple of months.
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-07 09:26 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 08:01 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 01:09 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 02:29 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 06:10 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 06:50 pm (UTC)(link)Unless I'm misremembering
Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 07:19 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-23 07:31 pm (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-24 11:22 am (UTC)(link)Re: can we make a list of all frequent noncommenters too instead of just the really bad wankers
(Anonymous) 2024-02-24 02:13 pm (UTC)(link)