' Tav couldn't remember the last time - if ever - that they had been tangled up with someone and felt happy. Safe. That they wanted to be there, and nowhere else in the world. They knew Astarion hadn't. Maybe this was a first for both of them.
The first of many, they decided, their eyes fluttering shut once more. '
850 notes
·
View notes
Are you slowly going insane over your OWN ocs?
No, I've been infected by brainworms the entire time. Nothing slow about it.
But honestly, no... It's not really about my characters to me. I love my characters, of course, and I love telling stories, and I hope to keep making art of my characters every day until I die.
But it's not about them! They're not REALLY what I love, what I love is people! And I hope I can leave the world with a hundred different love letters so my readers can feel how much I love them for even one day longer than I am here.
My characters are a conduit through which I can give that to people. I want nothing more than to make someone feel a little more loved, a little more seen, and a little less alone. And my characters are the best way I know how to do that.
So for that, they're incredibly important to me... But they're not for me. They're for you!
So I hope you enjoy them
and I hope you can feel that I love you through them.
41 notes
·
View notes
Hey I hope this is okay to ask. I saw that you sent the Sandman Big Ban a ask about the faq. Are you satisfied with their reply? I don't know if this is really common and if I should participate
Hey nonnie, that's entirely fine to ask yes!
Short answer: no, I'm not.
Long answer, giving a few reasons with none of my snark being aimed at you personally:
This is how it's done. No, this is absolutely not standard practise - I can name you at least 5 bangs off the top of my head that do not, in fact, do this. Including content restrictions is very much a choice that the mods are making, whether it also is their private opinion or not. None of those other bangs have problems matching, which brings me to:
No PWP: first of all, their word count requirement is incredibly low at 6k, and claiming that authors would struggle to hit that with "porn only"? That's, I'm sorry, ridiculous, not to mention condescending as hell - authors are perfectly capable estimating whether they can hit goals or not with whatever plot (or lack thereof) they are writing.
Artists/betas won't want to claim, or need to know what they get into: First of all, there is a huge bunch of amazing nsfw art and artists in this fandom who, I'd assume, would be happy to make nsfw/dark art. Second of all: have authors provide content notes/warnings for the claiming process, problem solved.
We're not banning dark/nsfw content, just any glorification of it: Right. And who decides what's glorifying? Do they vet this during sign ups? Claiming? Might I end up submitting a fic and get it pulled? Do I have to provide personal information about my trauma to be "allowed" to write dark content in a certain kind of way? This is a slippery slope at best. It is also massively hypocritical because, you'll notice, there are no such restrictions when it comes to violence or murder etc. It gives big ole "I can excuse the eye-eating serial killer, but I'll draw the line at porn" vibes which is a staple of anti culture.
On the above point, it is also worth noting that the entire argument is moot to begin with because even if it is "glorifying" or "romanticizing" it literally does not matter. It's fiction. It's not real. Tag your shit, give warnings during the claiming process, and it's fine. Everything else is cuddling up to censorship, there is no middle ground to be had here. (Which is arguably very ironic considering both the source material and the source material author's stance on such things. Yes I'm salty as fuck about this. Anyway).
All this is to make the event "more accessible." This is, frankly, absolute goddamn bullshit. If people warn properly for their content, and if in the context of a discord server for the fest you have designated spaces to talk about nsfw and/or dark content, people are perfectly capable of curating their experience, what they engage with or not. Conversely, banning content, considering yourself as mods an authority on what is and isn't glorification, is not only condescending as hell, it also makes your fest, in fact, less accessible for anyone who a) wants to write such content, or b) simply is not a fan of censorship vibes in their fandom spaces.
So long story short, I'm the opposite of satisfied and will absolutely not participate. People are, of course, welcome to run their events however they want. I am, of course, perfectly in my rights to run my own big bang without all this nonsense, which is something I am considering doing because I love big bangs, and hate the thought of relinquishing the fest format to something so inaccessible. 😉
144 notes
·
View notes
i'm nosy as fuck so if anyone has an info re whatever the hell is going on with the 'renew as a crew' people, i'd love to hear it!
this is the story i've cobbled together based on a lot of vague/subtweets and context clues, etc:
someone in the raac group was given the name of a Max employee (presumably someone with some kind of input into programming decisions, etc, but for all i know, this 'insider' was just some intern or something)
that raac person contacted (likely by phone) the Max employee in such a way (tone? quantity?) that it was deemed (by other raac peeps? or by the Max employee themself?) to be 'harassment.'
this caused some raac people (or maybe it was just people who found out about this on an ofmd discord? or maybe both) to insist on a change in raac leadership or at least to oust the person who misused the industry source
a leadership transition was going to happen, and then it just didn't? because raac leadership decided, nah, they don't want to step aside after all? but while this transition was being worked out and then later disregarded, the fandom was asking for guidance re who/how to tag etc, and raac was unable to respond because of this leadership struggle
a new twitter account - adopt our crew - was recently created to act as a hub of info for anyone wanting to help online engagement. they want to provide info like who to tag and what tags to use, tips on what to say in your posts, how often to comment, etc. they're not collecting money and the people behind the account want to remain anonymous.
i have seen some twitter accounts demanding that the adopt our crew people name themselves publicly in the name of "transparency" even though the allies of the raac industry source harasser have (allegedly?) taken to harassing the people who most vocally wanted a leadership change... presumably these are the same people who run the adopt our crew account - or who have an association / friendship with those people.
the accounts i saw asking that adopt our crew name themselves were all izzystans, according to their own twitter bios. and based on some of their other tweets i saw when i looked at their accounts, their general vibe is that they don't like the show anymore, don't want a third season, and wouldn't watch a third season if it ever comes to be. so... why are they so concerned with the "transparency" of a twitter fan account advocating for something they don't care about??
5 notes
·
View notes