coaltide | Coal Rivalry

Entry tags:

2025

Coal Rivalry

All the things Coal said, running through my head.

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

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

CYRT

Oh I agree, sadly. It just pisses me off to see this person being allowed to shove their ramblings at people year after year. Making anyone receive them is rude even if there was a backup gift. "Here's a bag of steaming turd, ok great, and here's a normal gift, you barely even smell the other one! Enjoy!"

Instead of double-assigning random people they need to start soarcing reliable bad actors.

Soarcing?

DC

Soarc was the name of a mod-made account that was used to contain the socktopus accounts. They assigned all the socks to create for Soarc.

Oooooh. Thank you, coalie! I was googling it like it was some slang term I could just look up, lmao.

No, the mods need to ban them.

This is correct. SOARC is a very limited-use strategy for when someone thinks all of a particular cluster are the same sock but can't be sure. Ie when banning a large group of people might catch some innocent accounts up in the net.

If someone's going to deliver an unsuitable gift and the mods know it, then it's banning time.

I'd go further and say there need to be bare minimum standards, rather than waiting for repeated disasters to stack up enough for a ban. Lots of exchanges say that art can't be on lined paper. Works having to manage basic SPAG should be the same.

Tbf "unlined paper" is an imperfect standard because (as evidenced by much wank, as recently as FIAB) it still doesn't guarantee art that everyone will find up to their personal bare minimum. Same with SPAG. I'd argue that the issue with bean10 is the nonsensical, plotless stream-of-consciousness style and the even more nonsensical rambling in the author's notes, neither of which would be fixed just by capitalizing everything correctly.

The unfortunate truth is that "bare minimum" is subjective, which makes it really awkward and uncomfortable for mods to enforce.

The fact unlined paper isn't enough to mean the work is good is the point. It's a floor on how bad the work can be. Requiring good enough SPAG that there's no uncle garage would effectively ban them. And if they were capable of editing their sentences to meet basic grammar standards, they'd also be capable of editing it to be more coherent than a stream of consciousness and maybe even getting better over time.

...How many years have they been around? This is my first Yuletide and reading the fic I would assume they were like 12. (Not least because they keep on mentioning their elementary school in their notes. Who still remembers and talks about elementary school in that much detail?!)

Check the date on their profile and weep.

Damn...

SC

Also while I was checking their profile I saw they had not one, not two, but three gifts from Yuletide. AND for two of them had the audacity to say in their comment "I wish you did x, but that's ok, this is great anyways"

Why!!!! Why!!!!!!!!

They commented like that on one of my Yuletide stories, too, which was not for them. Thanks? (They didn't kudos, either.)

That is... so bizarre and rude, but I hope at least that the absurdity of recieving con(?)crit from none other than Bean10 made the experience funny rather than annoying.

It mostly amused me, because somehow in all my years writing fanfiction, I've never received a "you should have (written other thing only tangentially related to the fic as exists)!" comment before now, and now I have one! From a "celebrity!"

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Coal Rivalry

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)

Re: Actual Coal (or, what were they thinking)