About Optional Details (Which are Optional!)

[elynross]

OPTIONAL DETAILSWhile you don't have to include any optional details in your requests, these can be very helpful in letting your author know what kinds of stories you like, and what kinds of stories you don't like. Each year I act as a go-between to help some Yuletide writers get additional information from their recipients, and the most common

Comments

[elynross]

As blueinkedpalm says, that's perfectly okay -- if you give your author greater latitude in your details, they're excused!

[dogmatix_san]

Question about matching.

If I request A, would I be matched with those offering A in any combination, like A,B,C, or A,B, or A,D,F, as well as those just offering A? (which would be nice and I'm hoping works that way...)

[liviapenn]

Yes, this is how it works. If you just request A, you could be matched to someone who offered only A, or A + any combination of the other listed characters, or if they offered "Any" characters. (meaning any/all of the characters who were nominated.)

Similarly if you requested A and B you would only be matched to people who offered A & B, or A & B + other characters, or "Any."

[beatrice_otter]

Something I've had twice: they list four characters, and then suggest story ideas that are incompatible with having all four characters--what the request sounds like they want is either a/b fic or x/y fic, but not a/b & x/y fic. Except they didn't come out and say it, so I then had to clarify with you to find out what they wanted. You might want to add that to the list of common questions.

[elynross]

Oh, good point! I will do that.

[hopefulnebula]

Re: the last note:

It's still OK to write gen if someone requests a romantic pairing, right? As long as all the characters requested are involved?

[elynross]

Oh, absolutely. The "don't directly contradict" them is aimed at more specific things, but should perhaps be better phrased.

[hopefulnebula]

Good. There's been enough "omg write this pairing or feel free to default!" in letters this year that I was worried.

[elynross]

Oh, that's not new to this year. There are always people who are looking for specific things, and only specific things, and that's why the optional details are optional. As long as a writer writes the requested eligible characters in the requested fandom, they're good.

What the request above is trying to forestall is (the rare) writers who seem to use the details as a negative blueprint for their writing, and generally there I'm thinking of writers who include things that people specifically say they *don't* want to see, in terms of pairings or tone or kinks. That starts to seem malicious.