Gen Fic, for SCIENCE!

[ratherastory]

This is something of a follow-up to a conversation in my post about the hypothetical Gen Big Bang, in which I discovered to my shock and dismay that not everyone agrees on what constitutes gen fic!

Thus I am conducting a poll for SCIENCE!

Please spread the word, I am really curious to hear opinions on the subject.

[Poll #1666301]

Comments

[alexseanchai]

Stories with no sex, no romance, no pairings at all, including canon pairings, and no mentions of any of the aforementioned at all
Definitely gen.

No sex, no romance, no pairings at all, including canon pairings, but mentions are acceptable
Definitely gen.

No sex, no romance, but background canon pairings are acceptable
I would usually label this gen, but a more accurate label would be the one...vehemently? somebody, anyway, came up with, 'bob'. Pairings present and referenced but not explicit. (Don't ask me to explain the etymology.) My use of labels depends on audience: I am not linking to the etymology of bob every time I use the term, so I only label things bob when I'm posting to a comm that's proven to understand what bob is (read, links to the etymology of bob in the comm guidelines, section 'ship labels).

No sex, no romance, but background pairings are acceptable (canon OR non-canon)
Also bob.

No sex, but romance is okay as long as it's not the focus of any of the plots
I'd label it shippy fic if the romance is visible, gen if in my head the characters are anything up to and including fucking like bunnies but none of same is actually in the fic, but a more accurate label (depending on the story) might be 'squint', as in, it's shippy fic but only if you squint.

No sex, but romance can be one of the subplots
Shippy fic.

[quickreaver.livejournal.com]

Shippy? I'm lacking in soooo much of my LJ lingo...

[alexseanchai]

Relationshippy.

[quickreaver.livejournal.com]

Ooooooh, okay. Duh! Thanks. :D