coaltide | One Wank After Another

CYRT

What a weird response, especially with that "Where are the examples, huh? HUH?" gotchas. There have been two examples in the thread that have nothing to do with Aurae, if you bothered to read. I could name more, but I don't actually want to put those recips on blast, because I think using DNWs to railroad someone into your prompt is tacky but not something you deserve to get a bunch of bored coalies poring over.

Also "just game for blank sign-ups in Yuletide, the exchange where you can't see requests during sign-ups" - what even lmao. Newsflash, the participants signing up with blank sign-ups aren't the ones posting their letters in the app.

I also enjoy the shifting of goalposts in

Give us an example of someone currently who has such a laundry list that no one could possibly write for them.

"Nobody, not one soul in the entire participants list could possibly write for this request" has not been the issue at hand here and you damn well know it. This is an exchange with (mostly) blind matching, lmao. You're well within your rights to DNW everything other than one (1) and only hyperspecific thing that could make you happy in this fandom, but your odds of matching to a writer who is the one person who would be happy to write that are pretty low.

Just don't railroad your writer into one thing and let them have some options. It's that easy.

There haven't been any examples in this thread that are actually anywhere close to unreasonable, railroading, or "forcing you to write this to spec."

CYRT

And I repeat, you still aren't giving any examples that back you up. In the wank about the unrequested relationships and how to write for that. Coalies have given reasonable options that could be done in 1000 words, but you're not paying attention there either. Also, wow, it's funny that you're the one suddenly trying to stake the high ground and saying it's not worth coalies' time to wank about people's sign-ups when the only reason this is an argument is because you made it one by insisting this is some sort of widespread problem in exchanges that needs to be fixed ASAP instead of a personal preference of yours.

And speaking of goalpost moving... you've gone from "all these people are demanding 'spec fic' and this affects me somehow" to "well, it'll be hard for someone else to match to them." What do you care if someone is trickier to write for than others? You're not the one assigned to them and given how fast Yuletide pinch hits get picked up, there's clearly someone out there who has no problem writing for them. And if you are matched to some "tacky" person and you've just buried the lede, that's why the mods have the clause about unreasonable DNWs so you can let them know that your recipient is railroading you (unless they've already told you no and you're lashing out here because of that). I wonder if you also get mad at people who get EPHs because they should have just sucked it up and been grateful for whatever shit they got.

Honestly, though, maybe I've misjudged your creativity because you've certainly managed to come up with some very unique perspectives on gifts. I am aware you can't see blank sign-ups at the beginning, but nothing is stopping you now from unleashing your creativity on one of them and turning this into a positive experience.

NC

I feel like this wank has had a lot of one coalie saying "But it would really limit what you were able to write if you couldn't do that, it's pretty restrictive" and another coalie replying "that's not unreasonable! It's easy to avoid if you just really limit what you write!" and then first coalie saying "See! It's limiting!" and second coalie saying "It's possible to just follow the limits!" ad infinitum while getting progessively ruder about it

Like. "That really limits what you can write" and "that's not an impossible limit" can both be true.

It doesn't fucking limit dick shiggly you butthole

it does if you DNW dick shiggly in the butthole

But every single DNW limits what you can write. The Yuletide rules themselves also limit what you can write.

The very nature of fic exchanges is that there are limits to what you're allowed to write. If this is an issue, then the solution is pretty obvious. Be free and limitless!

I think it's valid to discuss where the line for "too many limits" is for an explicitly ODAO exchange, personally, though I don't have strong feelings on what it should be.

I just wish we were still having that argument instead of people repeatedly saying "but setting limits on your writer doesn't limit your writer." like. Obviously people are going to disagree on that one.

I am willing to agree that outrageous, railroady, excessively limiting prompts exist and can exist, but no one's cited any real ones I would agree with except for the case of Aurae Socktopus Georg.

The volume of "It's terrible how so many people write railroady requests nowadays!" assertions is annoying when this begs the question so urgently.

DC

I mean, read between the lines there. A lot of coalies agreeing about railroady requests are probably complaining about their current assignment. They're not going to be spilling more info on that for obvious reasons.

I'm not sure why you're dismissing the cited examples just because you disagree. That's just, like, your opinion, man. I've written for one of those people and yes it felt exactly like writing a commission. Maybe you just feel differently because your tastes align with the recip's tastes.

CYRT

A lot of coalies agreeing about railroady requests are probably complaining about their current assignment. They're not going to be spilling more info on that for obvious reasons. Sure, maybe!

Just to make sure we are on the same page:

The cited examples are:

-Aurae/Aariel/I think it was actually MiriamKenneath or Blue_Ringed_Octopus, throwing a hissy fit over getting a mention of Padme when asking for a Vader/Leia fic
-An unspecified person who takes "no previous relationships" to an unusual degree, not named
-BardicRaven

And further back in coal:
-DNW italics/other emphasis
-DNW incest/rape for Black Jewels

And I think there was another one on last post but someone else will have to dig that up?

I'm not sure why you're dismissing the cited examples just because you disagree. That's just, like, your opinion, man. I've written for one of those people and yes it felt exactly like writing a commission. Maybe you just feel differently because your tastes align with the recip's tastes.

If the assertion is "some people are railroading", then I think it is reasonable to look at specific examples and opine on whether they are railroady. The assertion was not "some people's long and complicated DNW lists are restrictive to me." I certainly can't disagree that different people will find different DNW lists easier or harder to work with! But that isn't railroading.

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time

Re: Unpopular Opinion Time