Calling all writers and artisits!
Jericho
a fan-base of 1? Have you ever wanted to see your name in glowing blue
pixels??
Now is your chance!
I have started a new on-line science fiction magazine called Orbital
Magazine at http://orbitalmag.com and we are looking for submissions. We
are looking for short speculative fiction, hard sci-fi, fantasy,
"slipstream" - if you are writing it, we want to have a look!
We are also looking for artists - sci-fi graphics wizards and comic
stippers need apply!
Have a look at our guidelines:
http://orbitalmag.com/guidelines.html
Right off the bat, I want to warn you that we are just starting out
as a market. Thus, we are broke. However, we are hungry and we are
looking to grow fast. I am willing to bribe you any way I can! I will
cut coupons out of the news paper and send them to you. I will collect
bottles and cans and send you the recycle fees. I will make up other
promises to amuse you. Please read the guidelines and give us a shot!
To further my effort, I will be posting here a weekly story seed to
get your mental juices flowing. This week, in the aftermath of our
yearly turkey sacrifice, imagine if it had been a colony ship from
another world that had crashed on Plymouth Rock. Would Thanksgiving be
the same? :)
Thanks a lot and we'll talk to you all again soon
--
Jericho Brown
Orbital MAGAZINE
http://orbitalmag.com
"Come read the Future!"
steve miller
wrote:
> Right off the bat, I want to warn you that we are just starting out
>as a market. Thus, we are broke.
You have a bad business model then. The thing is when you start a
business you starve the owner and feed the business. If your business
is publishing, that means you starve the owner and feed the writers.
Starving the writers won't grow your business; and if you see this
publication as a hobby and not a business -- if you aren't paying
reasonably -- then perhaps you shoudl call yourself an "outlet"
instead of a market.
Steve Miller
www.korval.com/srmcat1.htm Liaden Universe chapbooks
www.embiid.net -- Lee & Miller electronic editions
The Tomorrow Log on sale now at amazon.com & Embiid
Alma Hromic Deckert
wrote:
> Right off the bat, I want to warn you that we are just starting out
>as a market. Thus, we are broke. However, we are hungry and we are
>looking to grow fast. I am willing to bribe you any way I can!
good. send money.
writers get "hungry" too.
> To further my effort, I will be posting here a weekly story seed to
>get your mental juices flowing.
"here" being where? in the newsgroup? um... are you sure about that
one?...
>
> Thanks a lot and we'll talk to you all again soon
if you define "soon" as such time as you are offering payment for
submitted work, then i'm sure you WILL be talking to writers pretty
soon. otherwise... call your publication by its proper name, a
personal website which might welcome comments from visitors, and not a
"market".
As a rule of thumb, if you want to start a business, be prepared to
pay for goods and services. otherwise you're just inviting people to
come play in your own personal cybersandbox.
A.
Coridon Henshaw <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE>@(T
11D73D.230...@netnews.attbi.com:
> Right off the bat, I want to warn you that we are just starting out
> as a market. Thus, we are broke. However, we are hungry and we are
> looking to grow fast.
Umm, if you're not paying then you're not a market. Unless you have the
working capital to pay writers and pay to promote your website then you're
never going to be a market. And unless you've got a way to get the revenue
to pay back your working capital then you're never going to be anything
more than yet another dot bomb hole in the ground.
While there are probably a fair number of SF writers and SF artists out
there who are are prepared to offer their work as a service to the
community, the only way you're going to attract their attention is if your
publication has something more to offer--in terms of readership or
otherwise--than the existing alternatives such as personal webpages.
--
"We're Americans. Fuck you." -- Paraphrase of contemporary US foreign
policy. / Patriotism means no questions. Freedom is slavery. Arbeit
macht frei. // Coridon Henshaw / http://www3.sympatico.ca/gcircle/csbh
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
> To further my effort, I will be posting here a weekly story seed to
>get your mental juices flowing.
Expect to be killfiled by everybody.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
Jim Bailey
[...]
> I have started a new on-line science fiction magazine called Orbital
>Magazine at http://orbitalmag.com and we are looking for submissions.
>We are looking for short speculative fiction, hard sci-fi, fantasy,
>"slipstream" - if you are writing it, we want to have a look!
[...]
> Have a look at our guidelines:
>
>http://orbitalmag.com/guidelines.html
>
> Right off the bat, I want to warn you that we are just starting out
>as a market. Thus, we are broke. However, we are hungry and we are
>looking to grow fast. I am willing to bribe you any way I can! I will
>cut coupons out of the news paper and send them to you. I will collect
>bottles and cans and send you the recycle fees. I will make up other
>promises to amuse you. Please read the guidelines and give us a shot!
Well, time to pull out my Theory of Paying *Something*.
If you're going to get into something like this, you really need to think hard
about paying at least a token fee for stories and art. Even a $5 flat fee
makes a HUGE difference, both in terms of image and practicality.
There are SO many people that post exactly what you've posted here in this
newsgroup, and I doubt that any of us can come up with a single example of one
that's made an impression on the field. However, there are several e-zines
that pay a small amount, that chug along nicely, have a good reputation among
various readers and writers, and who seem to have potential to grow.
You own a computer, you're paying for an ISP, for web hosting, for the domain,
and by the "Orbital Webworks Ltd." bit, I presume you've also paid the
several-hundred dollar filing fee for creating a Limited Liability Company
(otherwise the use of "Ltd" in the company name is illegal)... If you have the
money for that, you should have at least a couple hundred dollars per year to
throw a bone to the people creating the content that will drive visitors to
your site.
The main practical benefit is that if you pay, you will MUCH more likely get
listed on market lists, and with those who post links to zines around the net.
It's far too much work in most cases for people to try to keep up with no-pay
e-zines that come and go far too quickly for anybody to track. Paying gives
everybody a sense that you're committed beyond a single issue where you
discover you aren't getting what you need so you fold your tent and go home.
> To further my effort, I will be posting here a weekly story seed to
>get your mental juices flowing.
Errr, unless you're doing this because you would like to *participate* in this
newsgroup totally aside from promotional activities for your zine, this is a
very bad idea that will put you well into the negatives on good will in this
community.
It's not about the money, though. $5 for a story isn't going to change
anybody's life, but absent any other knowledge of your existence beyond this
post, somebody who spends the time and effort in writing a story deserves
enough respect for you to at least forego a Big Mac and fries this week.
That's the least you can do before asking them to chance their work to your
slush pile.
Also, from your guidelines: "We know for a fact that certain BIG TIME editors
read electronic markets looking for authors for their magazines and
anthologies."
No, that's not true. They get far more submissions through normal channels
than they could ever use, so perusing e-zines, particularly no-pay ones, is a
waste of their time. That's aside from the fact that they don't typically want
reprints, and having a story on your site forever burns the more valuable first
rights for a story.
You also don't define the terms of the rights you do wish to use. Do you want
exclusive rights? non-exclusive? a limited term? archival rights? if the author
wishes to take the story down after a while, will you comply? will you offer a
written contract to whatever terms apply?
If you're serious, you need to sit down and figure all of this out. It's far
more work to pull off a successful site than building it and hoping people
come. Or if you're content with running a hobby site and seeing what you can
do, don't overinflate your claims about exposure and future goals, just get on
with it and make sure that people understand they aren't going to get famous
having their work on your site.
Either way, you'd be more likely to garner more respect than trying to play the
"pro" game with an amateur approach.
Best,
Jim Bailey
--
Elysian Fiction (Fantasy short story e-zine)
http://www.elysianfiction.com/
Steve Taylor
> Well, time to pull out my Theory of Paying *Something*.
[...megasnip...]
Good stuff. You should archive that whole post for the next time this
happens (i.e. - within the next two weeks). I think it constitutes a
good mini-faq on the subject.
> Jim Bailey
Steve
Jericho
I want to thank you for reading my post, then actually going out to
the site and reading what I had out there. Constructive feedback is a
good thing and don't we all need it? Thank you!
If I may, I'd like to answer a few things and make my case.
[...]
> You own a computer, you're paying for an ISP, for web hosting, for the
> domain, and by the "Orbital Webworks Ltd." bit, I presume you've also paid the
> several-hundred dollar filing fee for creating a Limited Liability Company
> (otherwise the use of "Ltd" in the company name is illegal)...
I'm still paying on the computer. My employer pays for the ISP. I paid
$25 for the domain and 20 MB of space for one year. That $25 came from
birthday money - Happy 31 to me!
As for the "LTD" thing - oops! - in the scramble to put together the
site I forgot that I still had that there. This happens when you start
goofing around on a WYSIWYG platform then edit the rest in BBEdit Lite.
I didn't spend any money to build a corporation. It's just little ol'
me. That has been removed from the pages.
[...]
> Also, from your guidelines: "We know for a fact that certain BIG TIME editors
> read electronic markets looking for authors for their magazines and
> anthologies."
>
> No, that's not true.
Let me drop a quote on you from "The Complete Idiot's Guide to
Publishing Science Fiction" by Cory Doctorow and Karl Schroeder. Chapter
14, pages 156, speaking of Gardner Dozois who is editor of Asimov's:
"... he also edits his annual _Year's Best Science Fiction_ anthology,
and exhaustively reads professional, semiprofessional, electronic and
foreign markets for stories to include."
True, I don't sit over Mr. Dozois' shoulder to make sure that Mr.
Doctorow is correct, but, I'll take his word for it.
So, I've updated my guidelines. I've removed the word "magazines" and
left anthologies - I can back that up. I am also working on a more toned
down version of my guidelines where I will probably remove all
refference to editors of other publications. I may be excited but I do
not intend to mislead.
Now, several of you pointed out my use of "market" in my post was in
error. Granted, again I apologize. I'm not paying anything, I'm not a
market. I promise to never use that word again until I can pay, until
Orbital Magazine is a professional market by SFWA guidelines.
Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a question:
What happened to you people?
I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I get excited
about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of you get
excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're afraid
to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
Fine, Orbital is a "cybersandbox", it's an "outlet". Groovy. Yep, it's
my little hobby. But, I've bought it for a year, and it will be there
for at least a year. That you can rely on. If it works out, and we get a
readership, and everyone is having fun with it, it will be there a lot
longer.
For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the future,
you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has changed the game,
folks. Has it made the game better? Maybe not, but the rules are
different. Seems to me there is a reason why print markets are dying
right and left and electronic markets can't get off the ground, or are
forced to pay flat fees or use volunteer labor. Everyone seems to be
stuck on an old and dying paradigm.
Let me give you a little history on myself here. I started up a web site
a few years ago, a comic strip. I worked damned hard on that site. I had
daily content, contests, and I did my best. My heart and sweat went up
every night. My readership never grew much, I know why it didn't now.
However, off a $300 investment, I made $27. May seem like a failure to
you, but that was the most fun $300 I ever spent. Next, a buddy of mine
and I started a blog a while back. Spent much less on that, $25. But,
I've made $10 on that so far - my returns are getting better! Again, we
tried to have daily content, interviews, fiction, etc. I learned a lot
of lessons from that experience. We're on hiatus, and the blog might be
dead, but it was fun and worth the effort.
Now, I have this project. The writers and artists will not be the only
ones putting their work and sweat up there for free - I'll be right
there. I've put my work out for free before - it didn't make much money,
but I've learned a whole bunch and had a lot of fun. If I could pay, I
would pay. I'm broke. Maybe I shouldn't have spent that first $300, huh?
:) When I can pay, I will. Those with a little faith and a willingness
to take a chance and have some fun can be right there with me.
As to my business plan, let me set it out for you: how much am I making
off this deal? Zero. So far I'm negative $25 cash plus labor. There are
ads on my site - affliate programs. The site only makes money if some
nice person clicks through AND buys something. I had those ads on the
blog, I made zero off them, an affliate program I have yet to include on
the site (but soon will) was the only one that made any cash. As it
stands, those ads are more place holders than anything.
As we go along, and when I can afford it, I will fork out cash for our
own ads. I imagine that the site will still be making next to nothing,
so those ads will come from my rather lean pockets. Why not pay the
writers instead? Well, frankly, instead of giving $5 or $10 to the
writer and eventually failing, I'd like to bring in readership and have
a shot at success.
When we start getting near 3000 to 5000 hits a month (could be a while
before that happens, we'll see) I can get banner advertisment and
replace the affliates. With banners, you get paid per click. Banner ads
aren't what they used to be, but they are a better income stream than
affliate programs. About when that happens, is about when I can start
paying for the work - become a real market.
Why will we get readership? Because we put up a lot of stories and other
fun features. If I was putting out only what I could pay for, then I
would be like every other site; struggling, only publishing a few
stories, losing the good writers to the bigger markets. But, here, I
hope with a combination of good art, funny comics, great stories and
some other surprizes I have up my sleeve, all donated - I will be able
to overwhelm the reader and keep them coming back. Make them share the
site with their friends. Word of mouth and a SlashDot or two will bring
people to us.
That's my plan. It's a little optimistic, but, so am I. Now, I can
either pursue this idea, and fail or succeed, or I can reject the idea
as being untested and unworkable. The problem is that I don't think it
is unworkable. Easy? No. But not impossible.
I understand writers have to eat. If you are living from check to check,
please, don't send me any of your work! Until I am a market, I'll be a
waste of your time.
But, if you are just starting out and you want to try something
different, give me a shout. If you are a working artist, and maybe you
want to try something under a new pen name just for the feed back, let
me know. I now realize that to some of you I'm just another huckster,
another dot.com waiting to go under. Fine. I must tell you that already
one person has contacted me and I'm very excited she has. I hope there
will be more.
Instead of shaking your heads and telling me I'm wrong, try it out. Help
me build this thing. I saw someone write up a "hampster killing machine"
thing out here the other day. Funny stuff! What did they make on that?
If they were to add a couple thousand words on that and send it to me,
who knows what could happen?
Let's build OrbitalMAG.com together. For us. What do you say?
Best to all,
Jericho
azqaz
>"We're Americans. Fuck you." -- Paraphrase of contemporary US
foreign
>policy. / Patriotism means no questions. Freedom is slavery. Arbeit
>macht frei. // Coridon Henshaw /
http://www3.sympatico.ca/gcircle/csbh
Um, my German is real rusty. Is "Arbeit macht frei", will work for
free, work will set you free, or something totaly different?
At least this inquiring mind wants to know.
Bryan
Coridon Henshaw <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE>@(T
news:b789d603.0212...@posting.google.com:
> Coridon Henshaw <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE>@(T<H+ESE)sympatico.ca)> wrote in
> message news:<Xns92D7C54ED...@207.35.177.134>...
>> Patriotism means no questions. Freedom is slavery. Arbeit macht frei.
> Um, my German is real rusty. Is "Arbeit macht frei", will work for
> free, work will set you free, or something totaly different?
'Arbeit macht frei' translates literally as 'work makes free.' It was one
of the slogans (not really the right word) used by the Nazis in their death
camps. That portion of my current sig is a collection of great lies from
the present, fiction, and the past. It is an oblique statement that blind
and unquestioning obidence to one's country makes one little different from
either Big Brother or the Nazis.
--
Steve Taylor
> Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a question:
>
> What happened to you people?
That's a reasonable question - you must have found it a bit much to have
so many people jump on you at once. There is a reasonable answer to go
with it though: Repetition.
Many of the people on this group have been hanging out here and on
rec.arts.sf.written for many years, and over that time, there is one
sort of posting with which we've become intimately familiar. It's the
posting that announces the arrival of a new web based sf/f/horror
magazine which is going to do great things. The better ones announce
explicitly that they're not paying anything (and you did this - good on
you!). The rest of them don't mention it until explicitly questioned. We
see these a lot. We never hear of them again. They're always announced
with a great deal of enthusiasm and optimism, but unfortunately this is
often in the form of a "professional" looking sales pitch or press
release, which can really get on some people's nerves (and again - yours
wasn't too bad on those grounds. The ones which make me grind my teeth
are the ones which start with "FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE").
Now there's nothing wrong with wanting to run some sort of 'zine on the
net - I've had the same urge myself, and only total laziness has held me
back. From the perspective of those who hear about it though, it's a
case of 'Oh no - not another one!'.
[...snip plan...]
> That's my plan. It's a little optimistic, but, so am I. Now, I can
> either pursue this idea, and fail or succeed, or I can reject the idea
> as being untested and unworkable. The problem is that I don't think it
> is unworkable. Easy? No. But not impossible.
Ok. It's good to see you've thought about it and don't have any
illusions of the world beating a path to your door. I do think you're
being an optimist though, as most people are going to want either fame,
fortune, or both for their writing - and an unknown site can't provide
any of those.
> Let's build OrbitalMAG.com together. For us. What do you say?
I say good luck anyway.
Steve
Jim Bailey
>
>Jim,
>
> I want to thank you for reading my post, then actually going out to
>the site and reading what I had out there. Constructive feedback is a
>good thing and don't we all need it? Thank you!
You're welcome. One thing to consider: one of the reasons you are getting some
replies, even if they are criticisms, is because your post didn't feel like the
typical drive-by be get announcing a call for submissions. This is a good
thing.
Fair enough, and Gardner is good about trying to find and read what's out
there, including e-zines, but a piece of advice -- make sure that you *print
out* and snail mail a copy of the stories you post to him care of the address
in the front of the Year's Best book. Even Gardner isn't likely to look at
much of what's on the no-pay sites unless somebody he trusts tells him that
there's something worth looking at, or you make it easy for him and his eyes by
providing hard copy. For any of the other best-of anthos, snail-mailing copies
is even more important.
>So, I've updated my guidelines. I've removed the word "magazines" and
>left anthologies - I can back that up. I am also working on a more toned
>down version of my guidelines where I will probably remove all
>refference to editors of other publications. I may be excited but I do
>not intend to mislead.
Excellent.
>Now, several of you pointed out my use of "market" in my post was in
>error. Granted, again I apologize. I'm not paying anything, I'm not a
>market. I promise to never use that word again until I can pay, until
>Orbital Magazine is a professional market by SFWA guidelines.
Like I said, you don't have to go that far. Even small token payments from
somebody who offers them fairly will earn a lot of respect in this community,
so when you reach a point where you can do that, you'll have well earned the
"market" term.
>Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a
>question:
>
>What happened to you people?
>
>I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I get excited
>about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of you get
>excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're afraid
>to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
>
>Fine, Orbital is a "cybersandbox", it's an "outlet". Groovy. Yep, it's
>my little hobby. But, I've bought it for a year, and it will be there
>for at least a year. That you can rely on. If it works out, and we get a
>readership, and everyone is having fun with it, it will be there a lot
>longer.
>
>For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the future,
>you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has changed the game,
>folks. Has it made the game better? Maybe not, but the rules are
>different. Seems to me there is a reason why print markets are dying
>right and left and electronic markets can't get off the ground, or are
>forced to pay flat fees or use volunteer labor. Everyone seems to be
>stuck on an old and dying paradigm.
Well, actually, that song has been played for nearly a decade, and guess what?
It turns out the new paradigm is pretty much the same as the old paradigm.
There's far too much out there to read than people have time for, even if it's
"free", so quality is as important as ever, and the primary way to attract
quality is for somebody to pay for it. There's niches where there are
exceptions to play around in, but that's all they'll ever be, niches.
But that said, there are *several* internet markets that are widely accepted in
the SF/F community as fully legitimate partners/competition to the paper
magazines. Take a look at sites like Strange Horizons, Infinite Matrix,
SciFiction, and others that attract some of the best talent out there on a
regular basis. Take a look at Fictionwise for another model. If you haven't
already, take a look at the full market listings on www.ralan.com and look at
the amazing variety of publications that exist from the pro on down to "4 the
luv of it" types like your own.
We're not saying don't do it, or that you don't have a chance, we're saying
that what you're talking about has been done several *thousand* times over the
last few years, and a few thousand more will follow you in the coming years.
So sure, there are people willing to let you post their stories on your site,
but even there you're up against a LOT of competition, so even getting a shot
at the better quality of that available mix is going to be a challenge.
[respectful snip of history and plans]
>That's my plan. It's a little optimistic, but, so am I. Now, I can
>either pursue this idea, and fail or succeed, or I can reject the idea
>as being untested and unworkable. The problem is that I don't think it
>is unworkable. Easy? No. But not impossible.
Again, fair enough, but also again, you're going against the grain of a long
history of similar projects. I think we pretty much all wish you well, but at
the same time, there's a definite "been there, done that, bought the t-shirt"
feeling to them when they come along for the umpteenth time this month. If you
think the skepticism of writers is tough, wait till you go up against that of
readers. ;-)
[...]
>Let's build OrbitalMAG.com together. For us. What do you say?
Nothing much left to say but "good luck."
But my own unsolicited advice. Forget about the "business model" for now, and
concentrate solely on the content -- you already know that affiliate and banner
money just isn't going to make a difference until you can generate some
substantial hit counts, so why annoy potential readers with them in the
meantime? Next, response times -- very important to keep people submitting and
to move up the ladder when people are considering where to send their stories,
particularly when it's low or no-pay. Feedback is another factor, but it can
be a double-edged sword if you're not careful and annoy writers by saying the
wrong thing.
Finally, participate in groups like this, or in places like SFF-Net, or by
going to local/regional conventions, but recognize NOT that it's an opportunity
to promote your zine, but that it's an opportunity for *you* to get to know a
lot of cool and interesting people and learn from them. Likewise, when you
work with those writers and artists who send you stuff, it's an opportunity to
build relationships that mean far more than whether your zine is successful or
not. There's also the fact that you'll learn a lot about the craft and art of
writing while reading your slush pile, but that's still a distant 2nd to the
personal aspect of this biz.
In other words, remember to have fun, because otherwise it's all a waste of
time.
Patricia C. Wrede
<jer...@orbitalmag.com> writes:
>I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I get excited
>about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of you get
>excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're afraid
>to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
Why should I get excited about the "opportunity" to give away work that I can
get paid $500 to $1500 or more for? Especially when I *already* have three
different publishers politely badgering me about my next book? And most
especially when somebody comes along about once a month offering exactly the
same "opportunity"? Well, not *exactly* the same -- you seem to be a good deal
more considerate and rational than most of them. But still.
>For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the future,
>you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has changed the game,
>folks. Has it made the game better? Maybe not, but the rules are
>different.
Not that I've noticed. People keep *saying* the rules have changed, but I
haven't seen any actual evidence of it. As far as I can see, it's mostly
wishful thinking, of the same sort that caused the dot-com boom and bust.
> Seems to me there is a reason why print markets are dying
>right and left and electronic markets can't get off the ground, or are
>forced to pay flat fees or use volunteer labor. Everyone seems to be
>stuck on an old and dying paradigm.
Print markets are dying? I haven't notice a lot of that going around -- or at
least, no more than usual. There has *always* been a huge turnover among the
semi-pro mags and fanzines, even back in the 70s when I first became aware of
them. And the pro mags -- Asimov's, Analog, F&SF, Realms of Fantasy, Interzone
-- don't seem to be dying, particularly. In fact, there are more of them now
than there were when I was getting started.
>Now, I have this project. The writers and artists will not be the only
>ones putting their work and sweat up there for free - I'll be right
>there. I've put my work out for free before - it didn't make much money,
>but I've learned a whole bunch and had a lot of fun.
That's lovely for you, and I'm glad you're enjoying yourself, and you should
certainly keep doing things this way if you're having that much fun. I'd give
the same advice to someone who was having a grand time building model boats
inside bottles. The trouble is, most of the people here are either already
professionals, or wish to become professional writers. Not hobbyists.
> If I could pay, I
>would pay. I'm broke. Maybe I shouldn't have spent that first $300, huh?
>:) When I can pay, I will. Those with a little faith and a willingness
>to take a chance and have some fun can be right there with me.
My writing pays my mortage, my heat, my utilities, and my food bills. Those
aren't things I'm willing to take a chance on. And when I'm not working, I
prefer to do things that aren't a busman's holiday.
>As to my business plan, let me set it out for you: how much am I making
>off this deal?
I really don't think your finances are any of my business; I'm not buying
shares in your company, after all. I'm worried about *my* finances. If you
can't pay, you can't pay...and you won't be seeing submissions from me.
Excuses and arguments about why it's reasonable and necessary for you to pay do
not matter any more to me than they would matter to my mortgage company.
>As we go along, and when I can afford it, I will fork out cash for our
>own ads. I imagine that the site will still be making next to nothing,
>so those ads will come from my rather lean pockets. Why not pay the
>writers instead? Well, frankly, instead of giving $5 or $10 to the
>writer and eventually failing, I'd like to bring in readership and have
>a shot at success.
Without writers, you won't have readers. You will undoubtedly be able to find
some writers who are willing to give you their work for nothing, but the odds
of your getting anyone who will actually be a draw for readers is...slim.
Because people who write well enough to do that can *get paid* -- at other web
publications and at traditional print publishers. And so far, you haven't
shown me any good reasons why anybody who can get paid for their work would
want to give it to you, gratis. You've shown me lots of good and entirely
reasonable reasons why *you* would want this to happen. But the only argument
I've seen for *me* is that sending you something would allow me to get in on
the ground floor of a new web-venture that has, as far as I can see, slim
prospects of generating any income.
Don't get me wrong: it sounds like a fun venture; it sounds as if you have
great plans; it sounds as if it'll have a lot of potential if you can pull it
off. I wish you the best of luck with it. But it also sounds very much to me
as if you're in this mainly for love, and I'm just not that enamoured of
electronic fanzines. You aren't a close friend who might be able to persuade
me to contribute something against my better judgement, purely out of
friendship, and I just don't see any other reason why I'd want to contribute.
>affliate programs. About when that happens, is about when I can start
>paying for the work - become a real market.
Well, come back then, and maybe you'll have better luck.
Patricia C. Wrede
Dorothy J Heydt
"Work makes [you] free." Used, IIRC, in Nazi slave-labor camps
to preserve the illusion that the inmates were there to work, not
to be kept out of the way till it was time to kill them.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Charlton Wilbur
J> Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a
J> question:
J> What happened to you people?
J> I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I
J> get excited about projects when I should be more
J> conservative. Don't any of you get excited? Or, has the world
J> burned you so many times that you're afraid to come out and
J> play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
"Fun" has nothing to do with it. Writers need to eat, and it's hard
enough to do that.
Why should someone put in the effort to write a story, then send it to
you so you can accept or reject it, and publish it on your web site
for free? Why is that any better than putting it up on a personal web
site?
J> For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining
J> the future, you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has
J> changed the game, folks. Has it made the game better? Maybe
J> not, but the rules are different. Seems to me there is a reason
J> why print markets are dying right and left and electronic
J> markets can't get off the ground, or are forced to pay flat
J> fees or use volunteer labor. Everyone seems to be stuck on an
J> old and dying paradigm.
The reason that electronic markets can't get off the ground is because
people who run the electronic markets forget that WRITERS NEED TO
EAT. The successful electronic markets are the ones that are run
professionally: to wit, the ones that pay their writers. Even $5
makes the difference between an amateur market and a serious one.
Why should a writer who can sell a story to Asimov's -- or indeed to
any paying market, even one paying as little as $5 a month -- send the
story to you instead? What benefit do you provide?
J> [...] However, off a $300 investment, I made $27. May seem like
J> a failure to you, but that was the most fun $300 I ever
J> spent. [...] I've put my work out for free before - it didn't
J> make much money, but I've learned a whole bunch and had a lot
J> of fun. If I could pay, I would pay. I'm broke. [...]
J> I making off this deal? Zero. So far I'm negative $25 cash plus
J> labor.
In other words: "I'm willing to spend great gobs of money and time on
my hobby, so YOU should be willing to spend great gobs of money and
time on MY hobby too!"
J> As we go along, and when I can afford it, I will fork out cash
J> for our own ads. I imagine that the site will still be making
J> next to nothing, so those ads will come from my rather lean
J> pockets. Why not pay the writers instead? Well, frankly,
J> instead of giving $5 or $10 to the writer and eventually
J> failing, I'd like to bring in readership and have a shot at
J> success.
How on EARTH do you expect paying for ads to bring in "readership"
when you aren't willing to pay even $5 for a quality story?
J> Why will we get readership? Because we put up a lot of stories
J> and other fun features. If I was putting out only what I could
J> pay for, then I would be like every other site; struggling,
J> only publishing a few stories, losing the good writers to the
J> bigger markets. But, here, I hope with a combination of good
J> art, funny comics, great stories and some other surprizes I
J> have up my sleeve, all donated - I will be able to overwhelm
J> the reader and keep them coming back. Make them share the site
J> with their friends. Word of mouth and a SlashDot or two will
J> bring people to us.
Where are you going to get good art, funny comics, great stories and
'other surprizes'? How on EARTH do you justify paying for advertising
*before* paying for content?
If you want to do this seriously, this is what you do. Pay $5 for
story, accept advertising, and target a niche market. Look at
HandHeld Crime (http://www.handheldcrime.com) as an example: they
produce an issue roughly monthly, they started out paying $5 per
story, and now they've got enough of a readership that they pay more
than that, though I don't know what their rates actually are. They
are an enormous success.
J> I understand writers have to eat. If you are living from check
J> to check, please, don't send me any of your work! Until I am a
J> market, I'll be a waste of your time.
A successful writer who's not living paycheck to paycheck is even more
likely to be able to sell a story rather than needing to give it away
just for the egoboo.
J> Let's build OrbitalMAG.com together. For us. What do you say?
Sounds to me like you're expecting people to volunteer time and effort
to build something FOR YOU.
I ask again: what's in it for me? What do I get out of this that's
going to reward me more than simply putting up the story on my own
personal website, or selling it to a paying market? When you can
answer that with something more substantive than "the pleasure of
contributing to my pet project," you might have a case.
Charlton
James Nicoll
"Work will make you free." What you may be missing is where it
was most famously used, as a sign over the gates of German concentration
camps in WWII.
--
"Repress the urge to sprout wings or self-ignite!...This man's an
Episcopalian!...They have definite views."
Pibgorn Oct 31/02
Dan Goodman
First: If you want to get your webzine noticed by people willing to write
for free, go to http://ralan.com, and give Ralan the needed info. He'll
put you in the "sf for the luv of it" listing, and include a link to your
site.
> Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a
question:
>
> What happened to you people?
We got burned by start-ups which sounded at least as promising as yours.
Most of us have more than enough outlets for unpaid writing.
A high percentage of the people here want to write fulltime. A small
payment -- a quarter of a cent per word, for example --
might be enough to entice some of them. Though not the ones who are
either already there, or close to it, probably.
> I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I get
excited
> about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of you get
> excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're afraid
> to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
Selling for money is fun and exciting. Publishing my own writing --
almost always nonfiction -- and having complete editorial control is fun
and exciting. Giving it away to someone to play with before it appears in
public is not fun and is boring.
> Fine, Orbital is a "cybersandbox", it's an "outlet". Groovy. Yep, it's
> my little hobby. But, I've bought it for a year, and it will be there
> for at least a year. That you can rely on. If it works out, and we get
a
> readership, and everyone is having fun with it, it will be there a lot
> longer.
Unfortunately, a number of people who weren't honest enough to be
politicians have made similar promises.
> For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the
future,
> you are mighty tied to the past.
Correction: This is a bunch of people whose passion is writing
speculative fiction -- which includes fantasy set in medievaloid
societies, alternate history, etc. Of the ones whose fiction is set in
the future, not all are writing about the future. Some may agree with
Patrick Nielson Hayden and Barry Malzberg that it's not possible to write
about the future; that any story set in the future is really about the
present. Some may have no interest in speculating on the future. Others
may be writing satire about the present, or adventure stories which
happen to use the future as a setting.
> The Internet has changed the game,
> folks. Has it made the game better?
The highest-paying sf market (20 cents a word) is a webzine; scifi.com. I
don't know if it's really profitable, or if it's a money sink.
> Maybe not, but the rules are
> different. Seems to me there is a reason why print markets are dying
> right and left and electronic markets can't get off the ground, or are
> forced to pay flat fees or use volunteer labor.
Print magazines were dying right and left in the 1950's. Start-ups
usually couldn't get off the ground.
> Everyone seems to be
> stuck on an old and dying paradigm.
Nope. A lot of the start-ups are stuck on a paradigm which never worked
-- the same one most upscale restaurant start-ups die from. "If you go
into business, you'll make money."
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
jer...@orbitalmag.com (Jericho) wrote:
[...]
<leaving this for the context>
> Let me drop a quote on you from "The Complete Idiot's Guide to
> Publishing Science Fiction" by Cory Doctorow and Karl Schroeder.
> Chapter 14, pages 156, speaking of Gardner Dozois who is editor of
> Asimov's:
>
> "... he also edits his annual _Year's Best Science Fiction_ anthology,
> and exhaustively reads professional, semiprofessional, electronic and
> foreign markets for stories to include."
>
> True, I don't sit over Mr. Dozois' shoulder to make sure that Mr.
> Doctorow is correct, but, I'll take his word for it.
>
> So, I've updated my guidelines. I've removed the word "magazines" and
> left anthologies - I can back that up. I am also working on a more
> toned down version of my guidelines where I will probably remove all
> refference to editors of other publications. I may be excited but I do
> not intend to mislead.
The reason why it's anthologies and not magazines doing that is that, for
one thing, the rights situation is different. That sort of anthology
isn't looking for first rights, they're looking for _reprint_ rights.
That may seem a small difference to you, but it's a large difference to a
writer who wants to be paid a healthy chunk for their first rights.
It just occurs to me that you may have a short cut to getting good stories
for your site, as opposed to what you're going to get at the moment --
which will be 99% unbearable rubbish and 1% "hey, this is OK." If you
could find a way to pay even minimal sums, you could set yourself up to
buy reprint rights; maybe have an 'anthology' area of your site.
At least that way you may pick up reprints from small presses, where the
story won't have had the circulation of Asimov's, and so the stories will
still be new to your readers.
Personally speaking, I tend to feel that anything I get on anthology
rights or similar is in effect "free money" -- I've already done the work
for the story, to get it into the first paying market. If I can't sell
reprint rights to another anthology, or put out a personal collection, and
someone offers me a small sum for _specific_ reprint rights, then I'm
liable to listen.
> Now, several of you pointed out my use of "market" in my post was in
> error. Granted, again I apologize. I'm not paying anything, I'm not a
> market. I promise to never use that word again until I can pay, until
> Orbital Magazine is a professional market by SFWA guidelines.
I don't think, yet, that you know what a slush pile is. I don't know what
slush looks like for a non-paying market. Let's just say I'm not
optimistic. The stuff that comes in to markets matching the SFWA
guidelines can be so resolutely crap that one despairs of ever seeing
anything publishable. (Which is presumably why editors skip like little
Spring lambs when they do so.)
> Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized, I have to ask a question:
>
>
> What happened to you people?
Life, mostly. :) Experience of things in the writing and electronic
fields.
> I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart. I get
> excited about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of
> you get excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're
> afraid to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
There's fun and there's fun. There's fun and there's paying the gas bill.
If you had a particular angle on things that made me leap up and down with
enthusiasm, then I might consider playing the hobby game. As it is,
you're offering the choice between a non-paying market and someone else's
paying market. That's not a hard choice.
>
> Fine, Orbital is a "cybersandbox", it's an "outlet". Groovy. Yep, it's
> my little hobby. But, I've bought it for a year, and it will be there
> for at least a year. That you can rely on. If it works out, and we get
> a readership, and everyone is having fun with it, it will be there a
> lot longer.
But the chances are that the major magazines in the field will certainly
still be publishing this time next year, and they already have an
established readership. If I want a story to be read, who am I going to
send it to?
> For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the
> future, you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has changed the
> game, folks. [...]
Not quite yet. It's slowly starting to, but as it stands right now, a
writer who wants to be paid is better off submitting stories to the
established print markets and a handful of e-markets.
I think it's reasonable for people -- who, after all, can only write just
so many stories in a year (no, Stross, we weren't talking about YOU :) --
to send what they write to where the most chance of exposure and money is.
Right now, that isn't you. It may be one day, and on that day you'll be
deluged under the usual vast and imposing heap of manuscripts.
> off a $300 investment, I made $27. [...]
> I started a blog a while back. [...] We're on hiatus,
> and the blog might be dead, but it was fun and worth the effort.
That's fine from your point of view, but I don't think too many writers
want to subsidise your education. That may sound cruel and unfeeling, but
market considerations _are_ cruel and unfeeling. Failure has no friends.
Start to be a success, and you'll be knocked down in the rush. That isn't
stick-in-the-mud, or old paradigms, it's the only paradigm we're currently
left with: capitalism.
> Now, I have this project. The writers and artists will not be the only
> ones putting their work and sweat up there for free - I'll be right
> there.
What are you sacrificing to be there? And have you thought what other
people would be sacrificing? If a writer can make $300 sending a story to
a magazine, and sends it to you instead, they've put in the same amount of
money that you have, and for very little back.
It seems to me you're looking for backers and shareholders, rather than
unpaid volunteers.
[...]
> As we go along, and when I can afford it, I will fork out cash for our
> own ads. I imagine that the site will still be making next to nothing,
> so those ads will come from my rather lean pockets. Why not pay the
> writers instead? Well, frankly, instead of giving $5 or $10 to the
> writer and eventually failing, I'd like to bring in readership and have
> a shot at success.
That, I have to say, made steam come out of my ears. Advertisers before
writers, eh?
I don't think you realise what you're going to get. You'll likely get the
stories that have been to the top markets, and the 3-5 cents per word
markets, and the flat-fee $5 markets, and _been turned down by all of_
_them._
99% of the time, there's a reason for this.
You're hoping that you'll get enough of the occasional good stories that
all editors miss, plus the way-too-whacky individual stories, plus the
wide-eyed beginners' stories, to make up a web site.
Nothing about that situation makes me feel I want to get involved in it.
Once there's money there, the situation changes. Editors and payment per
word perform at least one function beside the obvious: they are a filter.
> When we start getting near 3000 to 5000 hits a month (could be a while
> before that happens, we'll see) I can get banner advertisment and
> replace the affliates. With banners, you get paid per click. Banner ads
> aren't what they used to be, but they are a better income stream than
> affliate programs. About when that happens, is about when I can start
> paying for the work - become a real market.
I think you have your cart resoundingly in front of your horse.
> Why will we get readership? [...]
> I hope with a combination of good art, funny comics, great stories and
> some other surprizes I have up my sleeve, all donated - I will be able
> to overwhelm the reader and keep them coming back. [...]
Which you'll be getting from _where?_
The best writers in the world can't photosynthesise. There is this
awkward little factor called "needing to eat". I dare say if one were
sufficiently strong-minded, it would be irrelevant, but so far it ain't.
Therefore, needing to eat, so I can continue to breathe, and to write
further stories, what am I going to do? Aim high, for Asimov's or F&SF or
Analog, with the thought that that might pay the month's mortgage, and
then -- if rejected -- go down the other markets in order of payment? Or
think, "I've just spent 30 work-hours writing this story, I think I'll
give it away free to someone else's web site"?
Most people, I gotta say, are not going to go with the latter option.
> That's my plan. It's a little optimistic, but, so am I. Now, I can
> either pursue this idea, and fail or succeed, or I can reject the idea
> as being untested and unworkable. The problem is that I don't think it
> is unworkable. Easy? No. But not impossible.
I don't think it's 100% impossible, because few things are. I _do_ think
it's 99.9% impossible.
> I understand writers have to eat. If you are living from check to
> check, please, don't send me any of your work! Until I am a market,
> I'll be a waste of your time.
Yes. And even allowing for that, you want beginners and hobbyists, and
why wouldn't they put things on their own sites?
[...]
> Instead of shaking your heads and telling me I'm wrong, try it out.
> Help me build this thing. I saw someone write up a "hampster killing
> machine" thing out here the other day. Funny stuff! What did they make
> on that? If they were to add a couple thousand words on that and send
> it to me, who knows what could happen?
I'll tell you one thing that could happen. They could spend a couple of
unpaid hours doing that, or they could put a couple of hours in on their
stories for paying markets.
It's not that I'm adverse to doing things as a hobby, but they have to
have something really gripping about them for me to want to do that.
> Let's build OrbitalMAG.com together. For us. What do you say?
I say: have a piece of old fart's advice -- royal blue lettering on a
black background is _not_ something I have the patience to read, and if
I'd just stumbled over the site by accident, I would have immediately
wandered off elsewhere.
Mary
Dan Goodman
> Coridon Henshaw <(chenshaw<RE<MOVE>@(T<H+ESE)sympatico.ca)> wrote in
It was on the entrance to at least one German concentration camp. It means
"Work confers freedom".
Irina Rempt
> For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the
> future, you are mighty tied to the past.
Erm? When did that happen? Last time I looked I was imagining the
present. Of a world different from the one I happen to live in,
granted, but still.
Irina
--
Vesta veran, terna puran, farenin. http://www.valdyas.org/irina
Beghinnen can ick, volherden will' ick, volbringhen sal ick.
Patricia C. Wrede
<dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>az...@eudoramail.com (azqaz) wrote in
>news:b789d603.0212...@posting.google.com:
>
>> Um, my German is real rusty. Is "Arbeit macht frei", will work for
>> free, work will set you free, or something totaly different?
>>
>> At least this inquiring mind wants to know.
>
>It was on the entrance to at least one German concentration camp.
Dachau, which is now a memorial/museum. I visited it in 1987. It's not the
sort of thing you forget.
Patricia C. Wrede
Boyd & Michelle Bottorff
> Okay, now that I have groveled and apologized,
<snip>
We appreciate the courtesy. Although you didn't follow the group
guidelines, I'm sure you weren't aware of it at the time.
I hope you have now taken the time to read the FAQ, which I just
recently posted. It expressly warns you not to do what you did.
<rueful grin>
Good luck with your 'zine. Of the umpteen whose startups have been
posted here, I think a couple have actually gone on to be successful,
and I hope yours will too.
> I have to ask a question: What happened to you people?
> <snip>
> Don't any of you get excited? Or, has the world burned you so many
> times that you're afraid to come out and play?
Well my guess would be that no one is afraid. (Afraid of *what*
precisely?)
I think you have miscalculated your reaction in two main ways.
First, off, this group has always encouraged professionalism. In
general, we don't *play* here, we *work*. We enjoy the work, but we
also take it seriously. Telling us you would clip us coupons impressed
us with your sincerity, but not with the ultimate success of your
venture. Many of the people here make a living from writing, and
submitting to your webzine does not appear to be a valid way to make
next months' morgage payment.
Secondly, you seem to assume there is something inherantly exciting
about your project. Unfortunately it looks essentially identical to the
many other projects of a similar nature that we have seen, the vast
majority of which have been financial flops. Getting a letter from an
editor saying "I have read your story and I like it, in fact I'd like to
publish it in the xxx issue of my magazine. I will pay you 5 cents a
word." Is exciting. Getting an email that isn't even addressed to you
that says, "if you send me a story I will put it on my webzine and maybe
some day you will make money off it", lacks the sort of immediacy needed
to generate much in the way of excitement.
So, not only did you break the "rules" of the group, you did so in order
to offer us what appeared to be a very dubious business proposition. In
short, you just spammed us.
On the other hand, as I said, you were courteous when rebuked, and we
appreciate it, and I do hope you make your 'zine a success.
Feel free to hang around and make friends. I think you will find that
requests for manuscripts will fall on more fertile ground if you are
asking friends, and not complete strangers. Although outright asking
for submissions is not allowed here (at least not until you are in a
position to pay) mentioning your zine is looking for submissions in your
sig (four lines or less) is always acceptable.
Michelle Bottorff
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
Auschwitz too, IIRC.
I don't remember it from Mauthausen, which is the one I did saw, but
then I got through the day by squeezing my eyes shut and hanging on my
date's arm for dear life, so it could have been there.
--
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan - ada...@despammed.com - this is a valid address
homepage: http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
English blog: http://annafdd.blogspot.com/
Blog in italiano: http://fulminiesaette.blogspot.com
Catja Pafort
> > You own a computer, you're paying for an ISP, for web hosting, for the
> > domain, and by the "Orbital Webworks Ltd." bit, I presume you've also
> > paid the several-hundred dollar filing fee for creating a Limited
> > Liability Company (otherwise the use of "Ltd" in the company name is
> > illegal)...
>
> I'm still paying on the computer. My employer pays for the ISP. I paid
> $25 for the domain and 20 MB of space for one year. That $25 came from
> birthday money - Happy 31 to me!
You trying to out-starve writers in your garret? I don't think anyone
here is interested in how little money you actually have. We're
interested in whether you're willing to put it where your mouth is.
> What happened to you people?
>
>
> I'll admit it, I've exagerated, and maybe it wasn't smart.
Not smart is... putting it mildly. I'm sure the resident writers can
find more appropriate words.
> I get excited
> about projects when I should be more conservative. Don't any of you get
> excited? Or, has the world burned you so many times that you're afraid
> to come out and play? Is this all just not any fun any more?
If it doesn't pay, it's taking away time one could be writing for paying
markets. Every month or two we get someone starting up an e-zine,
begging for submissions that will change the world, and so far they
haven't changed much. Writers still need to eat.
> Fine, Orbital is a "cybersandbox", it's an "outlet". Groovy. Yep, it's
> my little hobby. But, I've bought it for a year, and it will be there
> for at least a year. That you can rely on. If it works out, and we get a
> readership, and everyone is having fun with it, it will be there a lot
> longer.
If I were you, I'd stop talking while I wasn't too far behind. With
every sentence you prove that you haven't got what it takes to even run
a moderately successful website - 'success' as in 'plenty of people want
to go there and will recommend it to their friends.' That's not success
as in 'people will click on my banner ads.' No traffic, no income.
> For a bunch of people who's job, who's passion, is imagining the future,
> you are mighty tied to the past. The Internet has changed the game,
> folks. Has it made the game better? Maybe not, but the rules are
> different. Seems to me there is a reason why print markets are dying
> right and left and electronic markets can't get off the ground, or are
> forced to pay flat fees or use volunteer labor. Everyone seems to be
> stuck on an old and dying paradigm.
We're *writers*. Words still have to be put together according to a
number of rules and guidelines of the English language in order to be
understandable. The more experimental, the less marketable. Being paid
for publication on paper may be old, but it's been tried and tested and
it still works.
> Let me give you a little history on myself here. I started up a web site
> a few years ago, a comic strip. I worked damned hard on that site. I had
> daily content, contests, and I did my best. My heart and sweat went up
> every night. My readership never grew much, I know why it didn't now.
Effort without skill won't get you far in writing, either.
> Now, I have this project. The writers and artists will not be the only
> ones putting their work and sweat up there for free - I'll be right
> there. I've put my work out for free before - it didn't make much money,
> but I've learned a whole bunch and had a lot of fun.
Tell me one single reason why I should put any story up on *your*
website rather than mine. I can guarantee a site that's free of ads and
hype; but much easier on the eyes. If I wanted to spread my work free
all over the web I guess the Realm of the Green Knight has a much better
chance of reaching readers than you do. You won't find anything I've
written on any site of mine, though.
> As to my business plan, let me set it out for you: how much am I making
> off this deal? Zero. So far I'm negative $25 cash plus labor. There are
> ads on my site - affliate programs. The site only makes money if some
> nice person clicks through AND buys something. I had those ads on the
> blog, I made zero off them, an affliate program I have yet to include on
> the site (but soon will) was the only one that made any cash. As it
> stands, those ads are more place holders than anything.
Lots of ads + little content = a site no one wants to visit. Grow up.
Design a personal homepage for fun, not profit, invite your friends to
submit stuff, and have a good time - don't try to pretend you're
something (publisher, web designer, businessman) you obviously aren't.
Catja, sounding trumpets and handing out shovels...
steve miller
wrote:
>What happened to you people?
Me? I've spent going on 53 years getting here. How about you? Do you
know that we are not a random audience? In many ways we're a
community, and you're not part of the community. Alas, your lack of
community knowledge shows.
You're trying to Music Man your way into our lives -- but you never
saw or heard of Mimeo Man, and you *really* don't get how much many of
us have given up in order to write and participate professionallly
here. Many of us have come close to starving for our art, many have
lost wives, husbands, and families to the uncertainty of the freelance
life.. Some of us have eaten brown rice and beans every meal for a
month while waiitng for an "in the mail" story payment. Some of us
have moved to the cheapest ends of nowhere we could stand in order to
continue working.
And so, when you come asking us to buy tubas to save River City....
I have to ask if you've read The Futurians? Do you know how ironic it
is that you quote the "Idiiot's" book as a prime source? Have you been
to any SF conventions? Any Nebula weekends? Clarion?
You have a lot of interest in success, which I guess is good. But we
don't see you showing any signs of knowing what it's like to live
here, of having relevant experience, of knowing who anyone is, and why
anyone puts up with us.
So yes, I get excited. Today one of my publishers called to talk to my
writing partner and me about three different projects -- two of which
come out next year, one the year after. That's exciting. Another one
of our publishers emailed us out of the blue today with an offer on a
project we'd done on the side... that's great. And I finally got my
head around the opening sequence on a novel contracted for 2005...and
wrote 2850 words. What a great day! A lot of the folks here know how
rare days like this are. What's not rare is people who want to ride on
our work, to give us opportunity to give our work away, to help save
River City....
My t-shirt's waterlogged, thanks. I wish you success. I wish me next
month's mortgsage payment. It doesn't look like the two wishes are
very related. I think the community here sees that.
Steve
Sylvia Li
>
> I say: have a piece of old fart's advice -- royal blue lettering on a
> black background is _not_ something I have the patience to read, and if
> I'd just stumbled over the site by accident, I would have immediately
> wandered off elsewhere.
Not having checked out the site myself... I still want to chime in
here on this point with a resounding agreement.
Color perception must differ wildly for that combination. I mean,
people wouldn't choose it if they couldn't read it themselves, would
they? But to a lot of readers it's practically invisible. I, for
instance, have to select such text to have any chance of reading it at
all. That's not the best way to impress me with the intelligence of
the site owner.
Designers, if you absolutely *must* have a black background, *use
white or yellow text*, okay? Or a very, very pale blue -- no, paler
than that. Nope, even paler.
--
Sylvia Li
Suzanne Palmer
> Designers, if you absolutely *must* have a black background, *use
> white or yellow text*, okay? Or a very, very pale blue -- no, paler
> than that. Nope, even paler.
And don't even consider making the text *blink*.
-Suzanne
Steve Taylor
And the only reason for putting text over a textured background is that
you're trying to hide your message steganographically.
> -Suzanne
Steve
Wilson Heydt
Yup...there's good reason for the old heraldic rules of tincture.
--
Hal Heydt
Albany, CA
My dime, my opinions.