One Wank After Another

[coalcube]

A blank assignment is a funny thing, isn't it? When you have it, you don't appreciate it, and when you miss it, it's gone.

Wednesday 10 December: Default deadline (9pm UTC)
Wednesday 17 December: Assignment deadline (9pm UTC)
Wednesday 24 December: Main collection works reveals (9pm UTC)
Thursday 25 December: Madness collection works reveals (9pm UTC)
Thursday 1 January: Author reveals, end of event (9pm UTC)

Mini-Challenges:

Crueltide | Femslash Festivus | Yulebuilding | Three Turtle Doves | Two for One | Yuleporn  
Family Matters | Queering the Tide | Yuletide Madness Drabble Invitational | TransTide 
Chromatic Yuletide | Unconventionyule | Wrapping Paper | Babytide | MultiLingYule 

Yuletide Discord for Hippos & Exchanges After Dark for namespace drama 18+ discussion.

yuletide | yuletide_admin | yuletide_pinch_hits | App

2025 Collection | 2025 Madness | Tagset | Letters

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

 

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

You're still not getting it. You insist upon specific baseline assumptions of behavior that we don't all agree with. They are assumptions inherent to your reasoning which you do not bother to explain, justify, or even acknowledge as assumptions. Given that you've essentially told me this is a byproduct of poor argumentation on your part, rather than a genuine lack of understanding, we can let that rest.

But no, obviously I would not say "Duckgirlie is a rude-ass wanker" on my public socials, because then I'd be doing the exact same that I was judging her for.

You're doing the same thing you're judging her for now, you just can't admit it, because you feel the ability to dodge accountability creates an inherent difference in the activity. But it doesn't. Saying it with your name attached vs not really doesn't matter that much, you've still said it - on a forum, even, rather than an individual Twitter account, which raises the visibility of the criticism quite a bit.

Like, come on, we're in fandom. Would you say it on an alt? If you said it "friendslocked" and someone reposted it, what then? Do you truly believe the most important thing to weigh here, ethically, is "can this public statement be attributed to me"?

I will say again that I think your actual motivation here is reflexive pushback against the idea that it's okay to criticize someone's behavior on fannish grounds (because of who and what they choose to stan). I think you've demonstrated that handily in this thread, and I think it's ridiculous. Again, she shittalked an asshole who is a Prince Andrew stan. It's not that deep, and putative surveillance is both unnecessary and, frankly, dull.

[(Anonymous)]

DC If it's dull, why are you talking so much?

[(Anonymous)]

I'm arguing about the choice to wank, and specifically the justification of wanking. The topic of the wank itself isn't interesting to me.

[(Anonymous)]

CYRT

Like, come on, we're in fandom. Would you say it on an alt? If you said it "friendslocked" and someone reposted it, what then? Do you truly believe the most important thing to weigh here, ethically, is "can this public statement be attributed to me"?

No. I wouldn't say it on my alt either, even though that account is not associated with me and saying it there would have zero repercussions for me. It's not about accountability.

Which part of "I would not trash talk a fellow exchange participant in public namespace because I believe doing so is rude" is so difficult for you to understand?

(Also, LOL at the idea that saying something on coal is more visible than saying something on Twitter. How many people do you think come here???)

I will say again that I think your actual motivation here is reflexive pushback against the idea that it's okay to criticize someone's behavior on fannish grounds (because of who and what they choose to stan)

I mean, that's a whole other issue. Yes, I also disagree with that. But that's not my actual motivation for thinking complaining about your recip or your assignment in public namespace is bad. Those two things can and do exist entirely separately from each other. We might as well have the above discussion re: rudeness about Duckgirlie bitching about the person nominating their own fic for Yuletide. I also think that's rude af, and it has nothing to do with criticising someone's behavior because of who and what they choose to stan.

[(Anonymous)]

Which part of "I would not trash talk a fellow exchange participant in public namespace because I believe doing so is rude" is so difficult for you to understand?

I understand that's your belief. You haven't come close to articulating why. Why do you believe non-anon criticism is worse than anon?

(Also, LOL at the idea that saying something on coal is more visible than saying something on Twitter. How many people do you think come here???)

Mmm, bad math. I think it's absolutely believable that more people doing Yuletide are aware of this space (or FFA) than follow DG on Twitter. The wank only blew up after her comments were posted on anon forums.

But that's not my actual motivation for thinking complaining about your recip or your assignment in public namespace is bad.

I don't believe you, specifically because of your failure to articulate any reasoning for your belief.

[(Anonymous)]

cyrt

No, I've said it, you just don't get it.

[(Anonymous)]

I salute your efforts, coalie.

[(Anonymous)]

nc

I understand that's your belief. You haven't come close to articulating why.

Sincerely, why do you need them to articulate the way behind a belief? If that's their baseline, I don't understand how it matters why they believe what they believe just that they do and that's where the disagreement stems from.

[(Anonymous)]

sc

The WHY behind a belief, good lord.