[ SECRET POST #3462 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3462 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 45 secrets from Secret Submission Post #495.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

The problem is, there are people who will be upset if there is a pairing that they don't like that they aren't "warned" for. That's why I tend to tag any pairing that appears.

[kallanda_lee]

I get that's how it originates - but I literally read fics tagged with Tony/pepper, while it was a Stucky fic, and Pepper was "offscreen" and just mentioned by Tony.

It's useless on a practical level.

[(Anonymous)]

that kind of tagging the the worse when you're into less popular pairings, half the thing under the pairings tag aren't even about them

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, that's how you end up with het pairings making it into the dropdown even when the fandom is filtered for M/M, and I'll look at that and I'll go "I doubt those aren't mostly stucky fics with some small reference to tony/pepper," etc.

[caerbannog]

It's so annoying. I want to read Pepperony but then it's actually stucky or stony 😩

[(Anonymous)]

It makes me appreciate the authors who tag it "Tony Stark/Pepper Potts (mentioned)".

[iggy]

I think in that caw they should mention the pairing in their author's note but not tag it.

[(Anonymous)]

Stucky fans are AWFUL about this. The amount of Stucky nonsense I have to wade through to find any Steve/Sam or Crossbones/Sin is disgusting. Stay in your fucking lane and leave the rest of us alone!

[(Anonymous)]

I tag my non-main pairings as minor A/B or background A/B

that way it's tagged, but people also know the fic isn't about them

[nightscale]

Ditto.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you. There's lots of pairings I don't like that are either fanon or canon and if I'm reading Thor/Loki I am totally cool with AU Where Thor and Jane are BFFs instead of awkward author shoving in that they did date but this is why they're not anymore. And I know other people have complained that for a while all Hobbitfics had unwarned for background Durincest because gosh darn it who wouldn't click on Tauriel/Legolas without expecting incest?

[(Anonymous)]

the best option is to tag it background A/b

[(Anonymous)]

I warn for minor pairings in the author's note. That way I don't mislead anyone looking for their ship by tagging it, but I still say "this fic has some background A/B" in the A/N so anyone who absolutely despises A/B knows in advance.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't see any compelling reason why anyone that unreasonable needs to be catered to. The fact that they ARE catered to by well meaning people like yourself just makes them more entitled.

[(Anonymous)]

You know what else is upsetting? Seeing new fic in a tag for a really really rare pair and they show up in the background for five minutes drinking coffee and not actually interacting.

THAT is annoying as fuck and people need to stop.

[(Anonymous)]

But there is no OBLIGATION to cater to idiots! Who are you writing for anyway?