Coal Rivalry

[coalcube]

All the things Coal said, running through my head.

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

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

[(Anonymous)]

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

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

[(Anonymous)]

Soarcing?

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

[(Anonymous)]

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.

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

[(Anonymous)]

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

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

[(Anonymous)]

No, the mods need to ban them.

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

[(Anonymous)]

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.

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

[(Anonymous)]

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.

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

[(Anonymous)]

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.

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

[(Anonymous)]

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.