rotflmao
intr...@my-deja.com
laughing too! http://www.geocities.com/wickedxwitches
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Donna
Don't you just hate shameless advertisements cloaked in the form of a true
recommendation... Sad, isn't it?
Why not instead go read a story at the archive of your choice, send some
feedback and that way you can walk away from it feeling...gasp...good about
yourself.
The saddest part about this whole site? It's actually run by authors, who
apparently have cannibalistic tendencies towards their own kind.
Kimberly - who is just pissed she fell for the scam to check out what was so
damn funny in the first place.
<intr...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8htpve$vhq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
frolicki...@my-deja.com
(referring to the Wicked Witches' review of Brandon)
They basically say you're a good writer but that with this particular
fic you somehow went wrong with the garter belt fetish thing. It was
actually very funny when they explained the garter belt logistic.
Actually, perhaps funnier than the logistics explanation is the fact
that it's incorrect. The comment made by the Witch in question is that
it is not possible to remove panties, while wearing a garter belt,
without fiddling with the garter belt first. This is not necessarily
true. Trust me. Details withheld in order to preserve a teeny tiny
sliver of discretion.
Becky C.
Tinka
> Kronos asks an excellent question. I would like to ask another.
> Some people insist that an author's story can be criticized and
> the author shouldn't take it "personally." Supposedly the story
> and narrative voice exist apart from the person who imagined
> them. If this is so, how is it possible for an author to take pleasure
> and pride in his/her productions?
Yes, the story exists apart from the author, and the narrative voice is
implicitly part of the text. I would rather argue that no text exists without
its reader. Each reader reads a new and different text/fic as we all bring our
own experiences and knowledge to the text. This is why I dislike the phrase
"authorial intent" -- I may as an author have intented my story to be read in a
particular way, but that is irrelevant once I post my story. It is now in the
readers' hands. I as an author cannot step in and say: "No! I never meant to
imply that .." because even if I have produced the text, I cannot control the
text. I would argue that it is in the production phase of the story writing that
the author can still lay claim to the story (although I often encounter people
saying things like 'the characters just took over.'). As for praise/criticism,
I'd say that it is a way of knowing how people have responded to something one
has produced.
I hope I have clarified things ;-)
--
Tinka
-------
Life's short and hard, kind of like a bodybuilding elf.
KassXF
>imagine my embarrassment when this was pointed out to me after it was posted.
>But again, the point was made politely, in a private email.>>
Don't feel badly, I once gave Krycek an extra hand. Er, after his unfortunate
accident.
kass
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
wrote:
snip
>Joyce may know a little more, but I've heard both good and bad about
>Critters (a online critique group -- I hope I've gotten the name
>right.) The mailing list format isn't the best for critique, but it
>can be better than something like ATXC because the people that seek
>out and join a critique mailing list know that's a big part of what
>they're getting into.
I only know virtual folks who do Critters, no one personally. But
what I've heard has been good--the catch is that it is a fairly large
group (and you're required to do critique as well as submit items to
be read, keeping up with it can be a challenge).
OTOH, I know of one minor published writer who has participated in a
small online critique group and he's the least-published of that
particular crowd (the group fell apart at some point when most
everyone started publishing).
Whether face to face or via e-mail, critique groups have their own
lifetime, it seems. I'm looking for a new one myself because the old
one imploded--and it's the third group I've done in 10 years (first
one ended, second one wasn't working for me, then this one fell
apart). They definitely have their uses.
jrw
Joyce Reynolds-Ward
snip
>That is not to say, however, that good writing critique isn't available
>on-line. It's just found more in one-on-one interaction (the cyber-version of
>the face-to-face critique that Joyce mentions) than on websites where biting
>humor is the overriding tone and "critiques" are served with a discernable
>level of condescension.
Oh, that can happen face to face, too. Especially if the critiquers
take the Turkey City Lexicon as their gospel (for more information,
look up TCL discussions on rec.arts.sf.composition).
jrw
d.LiNeAtE
>
> In this crazy, mixed-up world, it's good to know that
> Godwin's Law still holds. <g>
Well, okay <wicked grin>.
In this case, I couldn't *not* use it :)
d.
Tom Mabe
misconception here about how criticism is handled in the "real world."
Let's say I actually manage to publish the book I'm working on. Let's say
it's picked up for a book club. A group of readers get together and
criticize the story. They find the characters difficult to identify with,
the plot line too wacky, etc. That's criticizing the narative voice. Why?
Because they don't know me. I'm not sitting in the room with them. They can
say I'm lame, stupid and dense if they like. I've been paid. I've gotten the
instant ego gratification publishing provides. I won't care. I'll be sitting
at home pulling up Amazon.com and trying to figure out why my sales ranking
just dropped.
It reminds me of the story about Robert Frost and that infamous repetition
of the line "And miles to go before I sleep/And miles to go before I sleep".
For years, classes have taken those two lines apart bit by bit, speculating
that he was discussing his own death, or just his journey or... blah blah
blah. Robert Frost said he just couldn't think of anything else that rhymed.
Does that make the critiques of the poem less valid? No, because they are
discussing narative voice, not the author's inability to find a word that
rhymed with sleep.
For those of you who've taken English Lit. classes in college, what you did
in class was criticizing the narative voice. And you're right, it is
completely seperate from the author and can pretty much be a free-for-all.
Now, on the other hand, writing for the consumption of the fanfic community
is a little different. There's the instant, personal feedback factor. It's
much more like writing for a Creative Writing class. You, the author, are in
the class. You expect to get a little constructive criticism, sure. If you
can't handle any crit at all, you should get out of the proverbial fire. But
what you don't expect, and what would never happen were you actually,
physically in the room with the "witches", is a broad personal attack on
you, your profession, etc. Ask anyone who's ever taken a Writing class.
Calling someone's fiction "stupid" or even "irresposible" is just not done.
Your moderator/teacher would say "hey, that's a personal attack. Stick to
the work". Constructive criticism is almost always welcomed by any author,
but everything changes depending on the forum in which it's being offered.
So saying they were "hiding behind the sheild" of narative voice is
absolutely accurate. The writers of these works are not, as far as I know,
published authors. They are students of writing, learning in a forum where
their works are open to direct, personal criticism. It is our job as readers
of *this type* of work to keep in mind that the author is there in the room
with us, sensitively listening to what we chose to say. That's why we should
rein in the negative feedback and stick to constructive criticism.
Put it this way, if the author were standing there in front of you, watching
you hopefully with those big puppy dog eyes and strawberry scented tresses,
would you say what you're about to write in that email, or on that webpage?
No? Then it isn't constructive. If you could say it, politely, to their
face, then it's ok. Save the blistering literary critiques for those who are
already published and feel no pain.
Jess Mabe (and no, that's not a pseudoname. That's really me. Flame away)
Kipler
way to have one of your stories mangled
by the witches... >>
Well, if history repeats itself... <g>
Last time this sort of thing was done and I posted something to ATXC about how
I felt, my work was promptly snapped up by the sitemasters, who had previously
ignored it or deemed it "acceptable enough" to be left alone. <g>
--Kipler
Kim
>Which means as critics they're total amateurs, and their critique is
>basically worthless.
Amen. We've had various people pop into this community and share their writing
wisdom, some with good intentions, some not; some with decent credentials, some
not. There is no shortage of writing advice to be had.
Since there are shelves full of books, lecture halls full of instructors,
meeting rooms full of writing groups, and betas who generously give of their
time, offering intelligent, respectful, constructive, neutral, and valid
writing advice, nothing the Witches have to say in that regard is worth our
time.
Since we have a fairly good idea of who the Witches are, there's nothing this
site has to offer anyone in terms of mystery or intrigue.
We all know the difference between hate and help, between snark and suggestion,
between trashing and teaching, between cuntiness and critique. We know what's
on the Witches site.
Therefore I respectfully suggest to all of us that we simply blow them off.
The Witches, and their defenders, will simply have to do without our attention.
I'm sure it will give them more time to pen their own masterpieces. I wish
them all the luck in the world with that.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Kim
Journ...@aol.com
http://journeytox.simplenet.com
http://www.houseofgentlemen.com/home.html
"I'm in your hands." Skinner, The X-Files, SR819
"Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." Rudyard Kipling
Pita M.
And I cheerfully forgot that Mulder's mouth was wired shut at the end of Fight
Club and wrote a post-ep with him chattering away as usual. Of course, I think
I can be forgiven for forgetting Fight Club... right?
Regards!
Pita M. (Pita1013)
(remove msr from addy to respond via email)
--A positive attitude may not solve all your problems,
but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.--
The X-Files Archive
http://fly.to/XFArchives
Lynn Ditto
"Pita M." <pit...@cs.commsr> wrote in message
news:20000612142445...@ng-ft1.news.cs.com...
> And I cheerfully forgot that Mulder's mouth was wired shut at the end of
Fight
> Club and wrote a post-ep with him chattering away as usual. Of course, I
think
> I can be forgiven for forgetting Fight Club... right?
>
We're *all* trying to forget Fight Club, honey lamb...<eg>
Lynn
lee burwasser
[[ snip ]]
> Since there are shelves full of books, lecture halls full of instructors,
> meeting rooms full of writing groups, and betas who generously give of their
> time, offering intelligent, respectful, constructive, neutral, and valid
> writing advice, nothing the Witches have to say in that regard is worth our
> time.
[[ snip ]]
Unless they get people to *pay attention* to all those aids to writing. Anything
that convinced posters to study basic English and basic storytelling would be worth
it.
> We all know the difference between hate and help, between snark and suggestion,
> between trashing and teaching, between cuntiness and critique.
[[ snip ]]
Some do. The noisy ones don't.
Lee Burwasser
*working stiff--don't blame me for policy*
Scarlet
Kim
> Therefore I respectfully suggest to all of us that we simply blow
them off.
> The Witches, and their defenders, will simply have to do without our
attention.
> I'm sure it will give them more time to pen their own masterpieces.
I wish
> them all the luck in the world with that.
So, should I understand by this that now I've dared to voice an
opinion which was different from the thoughts of the majority on the
subject, I'm gonna be shut out of the fanfic community?
Does this mean that I should have voiced these opinions under another
name in order to avoid this?
Is it such a crime to have different sets of values?
To find something funny and harmless when you find it humiliating and
crass?
Does that make me a bad person in the eye of the community because now
people are going to think that:
A) I'm a witch.
B) I enjoy seeing people being humiliated in public?
I just wanna say that I thought the witches site could bring something
new to the fanfic world. I know, I know, you disagree, and I respect
that. I've heard your views on the matter and now I understand that
what is not offensive to some is offensive to others.
I could say I apologize, say that I've seen the errors of my ways and
made a terrible mistake, but it would be a lie, because I still
believe criticism, any criticism, as harsh and clumsy and unfair as it
may be is better than silence and indifference. I wouldn't be able to
look at myself in a mirror again if I did this.
Maybe I'm a bad person, but I can't lie. I won't sell my soul to have
my requests answered and my fics archived.
Scarlet.
GravesPA2
soul to have my requests answered and my fics archived.>>
Well, fortunately, most people really don't give a rat's rear end about the
personality and opinions of a story's author as long as the fic is engaging and
appealing.
I myself didn't find anything particularly funny or refreshing about the
Witches' site. It's much like a public gossip fest--- engaging to those
involved in the gossip, but probably boring to those not involved and painful
and humiliating to those who are the subject of the gossip.
However, I don't think that the fact that you did find value in the site
somehow renders your opinions and your fanfic unworthy of attention. There
probably aren't many people here who do. So I doubt you'll see much if any
effect from what you've had to say in terms of who archives your stories or
answers your posts. ;)
Paula Graves
A woman and her okra create a little webpage....
http://members.aol.com/gravespa2/index.htm
Scarlet
Deirdre <
> Just out of curiousity, Scarlet -- I question your earlier
accusation
> -- how it is censorship if the site dies because we ignore it?
God, I've answered so many posts that I can't remember where I said
that.
It is a censorship of silence, and we know that silence is the worst
thing which can happen to an author or a poster on usenet. Now this
said, I understand that if you find the site despicable, you're
certainly not going to advertise it, and you have every right to do
so. I'm just saying that this site will remain mostly unknown and that
people who might have found it interesting will never hear about it.
That's all. And I don't want to argue on the fact that you think it
is a blessing if it is ignored.
I've heard your views on the subjects, you've heard mine. And honestly
at the moment my fighting spirit is a bit deflated. I was just telling
someone how pleased I was that this thread didn't degenerate into a
flame war, that we all tried to express our point of views without
animosity towards each other. Now I've just read something which leads
me to think that I'm about to be shut out of the community for daring
to defend the witches, I've received private, not too subtles
innuendoes which implied that if I defended this site I must be a
witch myself. So forgive me if I'm just a little stunned right now.
> Almost nothing in those MSTs is useful advice, which
> makes the site at least worthless, and at worse, damaging to those
> who don't know better.
I just would like to point out that this discussion made me doubt
about the legitimacy of my arguments, I'm not so stubborn that I won't
admit I'm wrong even if I know I am.
I had noticed that one of the 'victim' was a writer I'd been
exchanging mails with. So I sent the link to him and asked him if he
was offended. He replied that he wasn't offended and found a lot of
stuff they said about his fic was sensible.
Could it be possible that not *everything* is bad about this site?
Scarlet.
>
> Deirdre
>
>
Teddi Litman
Scarlet wrote:
>
>
> Maybe I'm a bad person, but I can't lie. I won't sell my soul to have
> my requests answered and my fics archived.
>
>
Paula said it better, Scarlet; but I'll say it again just in case you
missed it. Very few readers will decide not to read someone's
stories simply because he or she expressed an opinion that opposed
theirs in a discussion. Even fewer archivists will refuse to archive
a writer's fics for that reason. We have our faults; but really there's
not much evidence of that happening here. On the contrary, I can only
recall the opposite happening ... where authors didn't want their stories
archived by people with whom they had major disagreements.
Archivists want hits to their sites. Despite personal problems with
authors, if the stories are good, archivists *want* those stories on their
sites. It's
the *authors* who tend to not want their stories archived on certain sites
... which of course, is their prerogative.
If you state an unpopular opinion, you will most assuredly get a lot
of rebuttal; but that alone is not going to stop people from reading your
stories.
Teddi
Kim
>
>So, should I understand by this that now I've dared to voice an
>opinion which was different from the thoughts of the majority on the
>subject, I'm gonna be shut out of the fanfic community?
No. Such a shut-out is not within my power, nor anyone's power, really. Nor can
I imagine that anyone would want that. You've expressed a controversial point
of view but you've not done so in an unpleasant manner.
What I'm suggesting is that we've aired both sides of this argument. It's not
really going anywhere. You and others have suggested that the Witches are
funny, harmless, helpful, and refreshing. People with the opposite view have
suggested that the Witches are bitchy, cowardly, anything but helpful and
unwelcome.
There's really nothing more to say about the Witches as Witches. It gives them
power and attention I'm not willing to grant them.
I would be delighted, however, if we took this opportunity to talk about good
writing and good criticism.
<I elaborated further in private email to Scarlet.>
I do believe it's worth trying to turn chicken shit (Witches) into chicken
salad (yum) by turning this conversation around into one about good writing.
What works for you?
What doesn't work for you?
What makes you love a story?
What makes you dislike a story?
Lynn Ditto
"GravesPA2" <grav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000612171344...@ng-cg1.aol.com...
> Scarlet writes: <<Maybe I'm a bad person, but I can't lie. I won't sell
my
> soul to have my requests answered and my fics archived.>>
>
>
> somehow renders your opinions and your fanfic unworthy of attention.
There
> probably aren't many people here who do. So I doubt you'll see much if
any
> effect from what you've had to say in terms of who archives your stories
or
> answers your posts. ;)
>
>
anyone's opinion, just stating my own. You have no reason to apologize or
feel that you've been labeled 'bad' by anyone here. A little difference of
opinion is a *very* good thing - especially when offered honestly and
forthrightly.
Lynn
sylvia
experience rang true for me, since I recently posted my first
vignette. I've snipped the bits I feel I can comment on.
In article <8i484o$51a$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, dlyn...@my-deja.com
wrote:
I've
watched
>steady, good authors ignored because they haven't established
the
>circle of friends to protect and to market their work.
I don't know if I am or will become one of those "good authors"
you mention. I jumped into the batting lineup rather late in the
game, without that protective circle of friends, that team
cheering me on. And maybe it's my fault for only sending
feedback to stories that really moved me, and for being shy about
joining things, but it takes time to cultivate an identity within
the community, and I didn't have that kind of time when I had the
impulse to write a post-Requiem fic. (Though I've watched the
show since the beginning, and lurked thru the online fan world, I
only read my first fanfic last December!) The fact is that
"market"-ing skills don't come naturally to me -- many writers
are introverts, and have trouble with self-promotion. It's
hard for me to judge from the feedback I've gotten whether my
work was "acceptable" considering how small a sample I have to go
on.
>>One thing that worries me about those like the witches is that
they
>have the potential of stifling risk taking and creativity. I'm
not
>concerned about the established authors, those secure in their
ability,
>and writing whatever they want without apology. But for those
who are
>looking at this as a fun place to play, as a stress release in a
>chaotic, crazy real life, and must post each time with
trepidation that
>their story will be next on the pyre, that's sad.
What you said about risk-taking and creativity really hit a
nerve. I was planning to follow up my debut fic with something
*completely* different -- the result of a writing exercise I'd
set myself. But people have requested I write a sequel to my
first fic, or stated explicitly that they want to see more in the
same voice. So of course I'm tempted now to drop my experiment
and give those who were kind enough to write me what they want --
what experience shows I can sell without an established identity
or marketing skills. I'm afraid if my next post experiments with
unusual imagery, structure, or voice, it might be a failed
experiment, and while that's fine with me -- practice is practice
-- I don't know if a newbie writer can use the fanfic community
as her personal writing workshop. I don't have a posse of
faithful readers willing to read and critique *anything* I write.
As I said, maybe it's hypocritical of me to point this out.
There are too many offerings out there for everyone to respond
to, and if people don't like the work of a newbie, it might not
be worth their time to write and say so. . .Just want to say that
I feel the pull to turn the writing skills I already possess
toward "entertainment" rather than efforts at expanding those
skills regardless of the outcome or the popularity of the
scenario. . .No one in my Real Life would ever see those
experiments anyway, so. . .
sylvia
Great wits are sure to madness near allied -- John Dryden, 1681
************
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
sylvia
das...@aol.com (Dasha K.) wrote:
>Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part
in the success
>of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of
others.
I'm more observer than participant here, so perhaps I'm
not qualified to answer this question. I suppose it depends in
part on how you define "success." I received few responses to my
post, but they were 95% positive. Can I call myself a success,
based on that sample? I assumed that those who didn't like the
fic generally didn't bother responding, but the number is
difficult to estimate from the data I have. Now, I'm not seeking
unadulterated praise; the most useful responses told me the
reader really enjoyed the vignette, but had a problem with
certain lines. These responses led to dialogue on issues of
character motivation, etc. I considered these brief
correspondences instances of success whether I "won" the debate
or not. As Paula remarked in a reply to my above post, different
writers have different motivations for posting, and therefore are
satisfied with different sorts of responses. I'm not insinuating
that I should have achieved instant fame; I enjoy arguing craft.
But I have to admit I'd be more enthusiastic about posting my
next fic -- the one that makes me jump out of the shower to write
down ideas -- if I had some indication that doing so would lead
to these sorts of dialogues. The vignette in question is an
experiment for me, so there are many points on which I need to
hear feedback, both coldly analytical and visceral. And if my
readership were larger, I would reap more thoughtful emails in
feedback, even if they still only constituted a small percentage
of that feedback. I suppose I measure success in part by sheer
number of responses, whether they be positive, negative, or
mixed. I'd like to think that, if anything, my story isn't so
bland or derivative there's nothing to say about it.
So, in order to augment my readership, I could follow the advice
given me by a number of readers and publicize myself by setting
up a website, posting to a number of lists I've never heard of,
and being more aggressive about recruiting readers on this group
and on several MBs I've never seen. I would list those
suggestions under "Marketing." And if I don't follow them, then
I understand it's my fault if readers don't flock to my work
without knowing what to expect from a newbie. I know there are
ancillary efforts to be made when feedback is desired on any kind
of project. My vignette garnered a respectable number of recs at
Ephemeral, and was archives by Sparky and the Primal Screamers.
That's free publicity, but it didn't lead to an increase in
feedback, maybe because it was almost anonymous and there was no
identity to associate it with. If I'd been a frequent
participant in NG discussions and mailing lists prior to actually
becoming a writer, perhaps I would have had something of an
identity. If I knew people from discussion, they may have read
my story initially based on that relationship rather than any
expectation of quality. But I admit to not having made many
friends thus far.
Now, maybe I'm just projecting, but I've often been chided in
Real Life for my failure to advertise myself and my skills
aggressively. People say I shortchange myself, that the "spin"
one puts on one's achievements is as important as the
achievements themselves. Maybe I'm going overboard making this
point. I'm trying not to whine and act as if others should step
in and do the publicity work that doesn't come naturally to me.
I realize I have a thin skin, but it doesn't thicken
instantaneously. I realize I need to "believe in myself" etc.
and not hide in the shadows expecting people to come to me. I'm
just trying to state what I observe.
I'm also *not* implying that established fic writers rest on
their laurels and no longer need to market themselves. From what
I've seen, most of them do, and are still active in the community
as a whole. I do, however, often see readers referring to
certain writers as the "goddesses" or "queens" of fanfic.
Nothing wrong with those informal terms, and nothing wrong with
Spooky awards either; they've earned it over time by producing a
consistent body of work. I haven't. But, when I hear those
labels used, I also hear readers waxing ecstatic when one of
those "queens" graces them with a reply to feedback. This may be
a gross generalization, but I assume from this that *some* (not
all) readers do tend to feed well-known authors rather than
unknowns, when their time is limited, just as they choose to
devote their time to reading stories by those authors based on
previous experience with them. (Yes, I admit that the first time
I sent feedback it was to you, Dasha; I'm guilty as sin <g>)
So. . .what was my point. If I'm too shy to publicize my story,
I do indeed believe my audience will be slower to grow, and I
ought not to complain about that. But I'm talking about audience
as a number, not a loyal fan club who will follow me blindly
down every path my writing takes as it evolves. I don't have the
message in front of me, but I think what Paula said about
"midlist" writers may be true. As far as I can tell, my vignette
was neither illiterate nor a work of genius. I fall somewhere in
the middle, where most of us do. . .a reputation can help
distinguish one from that mass. Who knows, maybe I'll grow one
in my own way. Too soon to tell. I should probably join a
mailing list.
Anyways. . .I was drugged. I'm running a fever of 101 degrees and
can't be held resonsible for my late night ramblings. Excuses,
excuses. <g>
sylvia
frolicki...@my-deja.com
> I would be delighted, however, if we took this opportunity to talk
about good
> writing and good criticism.
Ooooh, Kim, have I mentioned lately that I love you?
> What works for you?
Mmmmmm.... any one of a number of things. Always, always something
original, something fresh and maybe thought-provoking. Humor pieces can
certainly be good. A POV other than Mulder, Scully, or general 3rd
omniscient is refreshing (I loved Shirlock's series of 3rd person
narrators, and have been wondering if there will be any more, hint hint
hint). I like stories that have some darkness to them, although I'm of
the opinion that angst is like the Force -- a powerful tool, but far
too easy to go over to the Dark Side of melodrama.
> What doesn't work for you?
Truthfully? (*allows her anal side to show*)
There are very few things that will make me dismiss a story right out.
But one of them is misspelling "Krycek." I know it's not exactly an
easy name, but my knee-jerk reaction is "If this author doesn't care
enough to get the name of a significant character right, this story
can't hold much for me." (I know, I know, this isn't necessarily
universally true, but tell that to my knee-jerk reactions.) Spelling
and grammar mistakes in general. Seeing the word "Summery" in the
headers makes me very wary. The whole "your/you're" and "then/than"
and "to/too" and "lose/loose" mishmash.
See, this is what happens when a child responds to being told "Go play
outside!" by climbing a tree with a book. You end up with testy adults
who are picky about words.
One of the other things that tends to make me dismiss a story is
injudicious use of crossovers. To paraphrase somebody or other from
that X-Files/NSync thread some time ago (specificity? we don't need no
stinkin' specificity!), just because a universe exists does not mean it
should be crossed over with the X-Files. (Judicious use of crossovers,
however, is fine.)
> What makes you love a story?
The biggest, and most general, thing that makes me like a story is --
dang, "verisimilitude" is the wrong word; I don't necessarily want it
to be like life, I want it to be like the X-Files. When the characters
are *right*, when they breathe, that's a story that'll suck me in. I
tend to be less hooked on plot than on character, because if I'm not
interested in the characters, why should I care what happens to them?
> What makes you dislike a story?
Mundanity. If I've already read this story, 15 times by 15 different
authors, I'm not going to want to read it again. Characterizations that
aren't right. Cliche abuse. Murky writing -- it's one thing not to know
what's happening because you're being strung along and in suspense, and
another not to know what's happening because you've read the same
paragraph three times and still can't figure out what it's saying. And
did I mention mundanity?
And I think critiques are really a form of flattery. (Not bashings, but
critiques.) I only take the trouble to go through and offer
constructive criticisms if I think it's worth doing, which means that I
care about the story. One of the best criticisms I ever got told me
that, somewhere inside what I'd written, was an honest-to-God poem
trying to get out. Now, on the one hand, this meant that what I'd
written wasn't very good. But on the other hand, it meant that if I
would just take the time and effort to peel back enough layers to find
the heart of my piece and then refocus it, I could end up with
something *very* good.
This is a criticism that I've thought several times about pieces I've
read on this ng, but never voiced. After all, the authors are total
strangers who have no real reason to think my opinions are valid or
important, and not everyone reacts positively to being told, "Well,
your characterizations are a little sloppy and your story is unfocused,
but there's a *fascinating* idea at the heart of it." Because most
people aren't really in this to Become a Better Writer. They're in it
to have fun.
So I guess I'm curious what people think is an appropriate intensity
level for feedback, etc. I know it's somewhere between "I liked it" and
a dissertation, but I'm not really sure where. Thoughts?
frolicki...@my-deja.com
When I talk about solid characterization, I don't necessarily mean *my*
characterization of them. Divergence from the way I think of them is
great, as long as it's plausible/supportable.
Example: having Scully, based on the whole ova/Emily arc, ache for a
child of her own is fine. Having Scully, based on the same arc, be glad
she can never have a child because she wouldn't want any child of hers
used as a bargaining chip, pawn, or guinea pig, also works.
Shutting up,
dlyn...@my-deja.com
counters I'm a relative newbie. In that my first post to deja was in
fact my first attempt at creative writing in over 20 years was a
daunting and terrifying experience. I remember it well; my palms were
sweaty, my heart raced, and I was so nervous I left my e-mail addy out
of the story so I couldn't get feedback. I also managed to accidentally
post the story under a totally different title - Reflections of a Rainy
Day/ Night --what's the difference, right?>
>There were so many grammar mistakes it was laughable. And as far as a
beta was concerned, I thought that was a fish. >
>So, I waited, impatiently. And yes, I was pleasantly surprised at how
well it did. But what meant more to me than anything was a letter I got
from an author whose work I admired. She told me what she liked. She
found some positive things to say, and then she began a "constructive"
critique of my story. She brought to my attention the "sloppy" sentence
structure, the bad grammar, and the ambiguous pronouns. And because of
that I know for a fact that I write better today.>
>I know that the "witches" vilified a new author, right around the
Christmas holidays. I found out about it after the fact. I know there
was significant discussion of it, however. And I know if they had come
after me, I would have probably quit writing. And that would have been
a shame because I know I have stories to tell.>
>I'm not trying to say I'm God's gift to fanfiction, but I know I can
string two sentences together in a reasonable fashion. And you know
what, I was naďve enough to figure that's all there was to survive
here, but I've learned that's not the case.>
>People talk of having a thick skin, well they're right, we should. But
that tough hide is for more than just having your stories ignored or
slim pickings in feedback. You must develop layers to deal with the
politics that are rampant. I've seen authors whose work has "sucked",
praised to the high heavens because they are a 'name.' I've watched
steady, good authors ignored because they haven't established the
the utter nonsense that occurs with archival. >
>At first I thought it was an honor to be archived on one of the rec
pages…and don't get me wrong, I'm human, I love it. And I worried
because some didn't seem to like what I've done. I worried that somehow
that made me a bad writer, or someone lesser, until I realized how
absolutely fickle this whole place is.>
>One thing that worries me about those like the witches is that they
have the potential of stifling risk taking and creativity. I'm not
concerned about the established authors, those secure in their ability,
and writing whatever they want without apology. But for those who are
looking at this as a fun place to play, as a stress release in a
chaotic, crazy real life, and must post each time with trepidation that
that something they've written will be torn to shreds for no other
purpose than to provide some sort of masturbatory gratification for a
few who are too ashamed of what they do that they can't even use their
on-line names.
Perhaps, they know they couldn't withstand the same rigorous attack and
microscope as those they roast.
I'm not paid to write, and if I happen to get a beta, which usually I
don't, she isn't paid to edit. Most of us are by no means
professionals, and we do the best we can around husbands, wives,
mortgages, kids, work, and real life 'shit'. There has to be a better
way to offer 'constructive' feedback without maliciously attacking the
person. And shame on those that do such drivel in the name of humor.
Meanspiritedness is never humorous.
~~~~ dlynn
In article <8i37ch$72q$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>,
Lisby
Scarlet wrote:
> So, should I understand by this that now I've dared to voice an
> opinion which was different from the thoughts of the majority on the
> subject, I'm gonna be shut out of the fanfic community?
Not by us, you're not. Why the heck would we do that? I'll still be glad
to try out your stories. I even promise *not* to create Web sites to
humiliate you if I don't like them.
>
> Does this mean that I should have voiced these opinions under another
> name in order to avoid this?
Avoid what? No one is "going salem" on you. You have the right to your
opinion, but we don't agree. I'm sorry that's the case, but it doesn't
make me hate you. No one here feels that way, I'm pretty darned sure.
>
>
> Is it such a crime to have different sets of values?
No. Not generally. And no one accused you of a crime.
>
> To find something funny and harmless when you find it humiliating and
> crass?
We've explained our reasons and you've explained yours. Your reasons
haven't convinced me. Our reasons don't appear to have convinced you.
That's an impasse. It's too bad, but it doesn't make you evil or an
outcast.
>
>
> Does that make me a bad person in the eye of the community because now
> people are going to think that:
> A) I'm a witch.
> B) I enjoy seeing people being humiliated in public?
I don't think anyone thinks you're a witch-- and boy, was there ever a
loaded designation. Rephrase: No one thinks you are one of the
mistress/masters of the site. No one is out to get you you for expressing
your opinion. I wish you could see why a lot of us don't like to be poked
fun at and sniggered at and have our hard work torn apart, but....
>
>
> I just wanna say that I thought the witches site could bring something
> new to the fanfic world. I know, I know, you disagree, and I respect
> that. I've heard your views on the matter and now I understand that
> what is not offensive to some is offensive to others.
>
> I could say I apologize, say that I've seen the errors of my ways and
> made a terrible mistake, but it would be a lie, because I still
> believe criticism, any criticism, as harsh and clumsy and unfair as it
> may be is better than silence and indifference. I wouldn't be able to
> look at myself in a mirror again if I did this.
I think you haven't really heard a word of what most of us have said. The
witches are not a bunch of dissidents speaking out against a repressive
government. They are mean people picking on victims. Critique has to be
done compassionately. These people are not into compassion. You don't
learn to write without mentorship. Mentorship is not what these folk are
up to.
>
>
> Maybe I'm a bad person, but I can't lie. I won't sell my soul to have
> my requests answered and my fics archived.
>
> Scarlet.
Scarlet, I think you need to chill out. No one is pissed at you
personally unless you give us something to be pissed about. Expressing
your opinion as you have done up to this point is called debate. Debate
is the free exchange of conflicting ideas. Now you are starting to stray
into the realm of hysteria.
Lisby
PennySyc
>So I guess I'm curious what people think is an appropriate intensity
>level for feedback, etc. I know it's somewhere between "I liked it" and
>a dissertation, but I'm not really sure where. Thoughts?
What I love (and what I try to do myself) is for feedbackers (is that a word?)
to quote parts of the story that they liked. It's helpful (and flattering!) to
know what parts of the story really worked for different readers.
And if I've made errors in a story (and who hasn't?), I appreciate readers
pointing them out. I've done the same, always trying to be gentle and
respectful in tone when I do so.
Leslie
WickdZoot
>me to think that I'm about to be shut out of the community for daring
>to defend the witches, I've received private, not too subtles
>innuendoes which implied that if I defended this site I must be a
>witch myself. So forgive me if I'm just a little stunned right now.
>
Oh, honey, this place LIVES for innuendo. In this instance, I second someone
else's statement above. Screw 'em.
If anyone gets an email from a witch, it's easy to have the headers checked for
IP addresses etc. If they really want to know which witch is which witch, it's
easy for anyone with network no-how to do.
I may not agree with you, but I personally think you're entitled to your
opinion. I still think the witches are feeding into vendettas and other issues
and that much of their 'advice', when sensible, is sensible in spite of their
intent.
kasszoot, checking zoot mail
Dasha K.
>steady, good authors ignored because they haven't established the
>circle of friends to protect and to market their work
You know, I *swore* I wasn't going to comment on this thread because I think I
said my piece on the subject way back when on the Haven's message board. To
recap: Witches. Snore. Rehash of Debbilmice. Mean-spirited antics from the
hopelessly mediocre. Snore. We know for sure who Midwest is from her IP
address. Bo-ring. Think I'll go back to bed. Snore.
But I did want to comment of what dlynn said. You know, I'm not sure if I buy
the "good writers are ignored because they're not connected" idea. Honestly.
Yes, this fandom is HUGE and yes, it can be hard to break in, but I've seen
writers come out of nowhere with a brilliant story and have it be received with
all the adulation it deserved. Think Nascent, think Reveley, think hapazard
method, think Suzanne Schramm. No one knew them from Adam when they first
posted, but their stories were *good* and they were praised as such.
And then there's people like me, whose first stories sucked large boulders and
were roundly ignored, as they should have been. (I'm not ashamed to admit it)
<g>
Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the success
of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dasha K.
I wouldn't kick him outta bed for eatin' cookies, especially espresso chocolate
chip shortbread. And if he brought me an iced latte, he could stay all day...
GravesPA2
planning to follow up my debut fic with something
*completely* different -- the result of a writing exercise I'd set myself. But
people have requested I write a sequel to my first fic, or stated explicitly
that they want to see more in the same voice. So of course I'm tempted now to
drop my experiment
and give those who were kind enough to write me what they want -- what
experience shows I can sell without an established identity or marketing
skills. I'm afraid if my next post experiments with unusual imagery,
structure, or voice, it might be a failed experiment, and while that's fine
with me -- practice is practice -- I don't know if a newbie writer can use the
fanfic community
as her personal writing workshop. I don't have a posse of faithful readers
willing to read and critique *anything* I write>>
Well, my gut instinct is to tell you to write what you want to write, not what
the reader wants to read. Especially if you're trying to find your style and
your voice. The only way to do that is to push your own boundaries and find
out what works and what doesn't.
Feedback can be extremely addictive, and it can also be extremely limiting.
You have to decide if you're here because you want people to write and tell you
how much they liked your story (and there is NOTHING wrong with having that as
your reason for being here) or are you here because you feel you have stories
to tell and want to tell them.
For some writers, feedback is why they write, and I say more power to them.
For other writers, feedback is gratifying, but they don't depend on feedback in
making their writing choices. They may occasionally disappoint some readers
who don't enjoy change, but I think in the end, good writing and an honest
voice win out.
So basically--you have to decide why you're posting here. To have an audience
who likes your work? If so--then build yourself an audience, enjoy the
discourse and the friendships that come out of it, and never apologize for
anyone for the choices you make.
If you're here because you have stories inside you that you want to tell, even
if they're stories that your readers aren't asking for---then write the stories
of your heart as well as you know how. And post them. You'll be surprised by
how many people respond to the passion of your choice, even if the story isn't
something they realized they were looking for.
GravesPA2
of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.>>
I suspect only in the midlist stories, if that makes sense. The truly fabulous
stories get attention no matter what. The really bad ones can't be saved by a
circle of friends. But midlist writing---yeah, I think that certain things
help midlist writers get more attention, including friends who will give public
feedback or being part of a well-read mailing list that gives your work more
exposure. And I don't see much of a problem with that, really.
TrexPhile
<20000613005613...@ng-cj1.aol.com>:
>But I did want to comment of what dlynn said. You know, I'm not sure if
>I buy the "good writers are ignored because they're not connected" idea.
>Honestly. Yes, this fandom is HUGE and yes, it can be hard to break in,
>but I've seen writers come out of nowhere with a brilliant story and
>have it be received with all the adulation it deserved. Think Nascent,
>think Reveley, think hapazard method, think Suzanne Schramm. No one knew
>them from Adam when they first posted, but their stories were *good* and
>they were praised as such.
>
>And then there's people like me, whose first stories sucked large
>boulders and were roundly ignored, as they should have been. (I'm not
>ashamed to admit it)
><g>
>
>Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the
>success of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of
>others.
>
>
My perceptions after writing and posting fic for three years now:
The "success" of a story is, for me, determined by the amount of public and
private responses to its posting. Since 99% of the feedback I receive
(both public and private) is positive, I naturally assume that a
"successful" story is one that is also considered a "good" one. And, of
course, it also means that people have actually *read* the story. That, I
believe, is what it comes down to -- if you're not "well-known," are your
stories going to be read?
The writers who have the most "success" with their stories are those that
have the greatest number of readers who like their work. These writers,
with a few exceptions, don't just burst onto the scene. They build
their reputation by consistently posting high-quality work. They end up
with a "following," so to speak -- a large number of readers who latch on
to every new story eagerly. And a lot of the time, these readers will be
vocal in expressing their affection for the stories and the writer. You now
have an "established" writer, a "well-known" writer in the community. Now,
if someone wants to translate these responses into "politics" or "PR," I
guess they can, but I think it's just an example of hard work and high
standards producing excellent results that are appreciated by a large
number of people. And the consequence is that these writers and stories
are deemed more "successful."
Now -- what about those writers that are not established? Will their
stories be read at all? This is where I think that there is a bit of truth
to the perception that an unknown writer isn't going to be noticed -- and
therefore their efforts will not be "successful." There are so many
stories posted in this forum that it's often necessary to sift through them
before deciding which to read. I do this all the time. And I will admit
it -- if I see a name that I recognize, one that has "delivered" in the
past, I will automatically download that story and save it for later. I
have bypassed stories whose authors I didn't recognize. Sorry. I just
don't have the time to read everything posted here.
And it's kinda strange, but I'm seeing this issue from both sides. On
ATXC, no one knows me. I actually wrote an XF story about a year ago that
I was rather proud of and posted it here. I was VERY nervous about posting
it -- after all, I write Trek, not X-Files. I *read* XF fic all the time,
but writing it is something else. My beta-reader (who is fluent in both
Trek and XF) assured me that the story passed muster so I posted. I
think I might have gotten two responses. "Oh well," I decided, "I didn't
really expect anything because they don't know who I am." Now, in my Trek
fandom, I'm "established" -- I've been writing it for three years now and
I get all kinds of feedback from everything I post and have received
awards, etc. I knew that my XF story was as good as my better Trek stuff
(my beta-reader makes sure of that, believe me) so I decided that the lack
of response to my story was due to the fact that the name "TrexPhile" just
didn't mean anything to the readers here. Then Dasha asked me if she could
submit the story to one of the XF mailing lists and that's when the
responses started rolling in. That's when it was confirmed, at least for
me -- if they don't recognize your voice, they're gonna have a hard time
distinguishing your song amongst all the others that are playing.
I wish I had a blinding orgasmic solution to all this, but I don't. As one
who has experienced both anonymity and "celebrity," all I can say is, if
you're one of the new members of the choir, keep practicing your scales and
strengthening your voice. You'll be heard someday.
TrexPhile, wondering how that damn musical metaphor crept in... must be too
many "Godspell" rehearsals....
Teddi Litman
sylvia wrote:
>
>
> So, in order to augment my readership, I could follow the advice
> given me by a number of readers and publicize myself by setting
> up a website, posting to a number of lists I've never heard of,
> and being more aggressive about recruiting readers on this group
> and on several MBs I've never seen. I would list those
> suggestions under "Marketing."
As I reader, I feel I must say I have never, ever been recruited
by any writer! Yes, I'm sure that sort of thing goes on; but
there are just certain stories that simply *deserve* the attention
they get and I refuse to believe it involves active recruiting
on the part or the *writers.* When "recruiting" goes on
for a particularly good story, it is by people
who genuinely enjoyed the story ... not because they
made some sort of deal with the writer. Just like
writers get a certain reputation, there are certain
*readers* I have come to generally trust in their opinions
of a story. When certain people go wild over a story, I
know that story usually is worth checking out. If someone
is just recommending their friends' work regardless of
the work's actual merits, it is recognized quite quickly
around here. And ultimately, a public rec may get people
to *open* the story, it won't get them to like it; it won't
get even get them to finish reading it. So yes, theoretically,
you could spend some time recruiting a bunch of supporters
guaranteed to rec your work. However, if your only feedback
ends up to be from the people you hired, what good is it really?
As I see it, you are much better off just writing the story
you *want* to write.
Incidentally, on a more personal note, your first story did
*extremely* well here! I count positive, public
responses from *seven* different people on this ng! I also know
for certain that one of them was definitely *not*
recruited; because it was mine. <G> You just have no
idea what a good start you have had here.
If you write good stories, recruiting is not necessary. :)
Teddi
WickdZoot
>Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the success
>of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
>
I think it depends on how you define 'success'. If you mean feedback and
public acclaim and awards, I'd say maybe, in some cases.
If you mean having readers discover the story and read and enjoy, I'd say
ultimately not.
There is always a lot of talk about cliques and 'the community', and frankly,
cliques do exist, and the community is far more multi-layered and diverse than
many people who post regularly would believe. Ultimately, cliques and this
public perception are not going to decide the fate of a story, only the quality
of the story will decide that.
You can have a gazillion friends touting your story to the heavens and voting
for it in the awards and still not gain the readership if your story is cookie
cutter, assembly line fiction. Sure, you may get raves from your friends in
public, and 'join the community' publicly, but how do you measure success?
Conversely, you can be sitting out there in the nether regions of the so-called
community and have little contact with others in the community and write a
dynamite story that gains readers quietly, without fanfare. You may not get
tons of raves on atxc, but you get several thoughtful feedback notes from
readers. Which measure of success works for you?
People will read what they like, what reads true for them, and cliques and
community are irrelevant. So, again, it depends on how you define success for
your writing and what your goals are in writing the story. Is it to make
friends and influence people? Or is it to tell a story and tell it well?
<shrug> It's kind of a personal call.
kass
Scarlet
Lisby
> Scarlet wrote:
> Not by us, you're not. Why the heck would we do that? I'll still be
glad
> to try out your stories. I even promise *not* to create Web sites to
> humiliate you if I don't like them.
Oh good, my mistake then, for misinterpreting the 'let's blow off the
witches and their defenders and ignore them'. Hey, I watch the
X-Files, I can be paranoid! ;-)
> Avoid what? No one is "going salem" on you. You have the right to
your
> opinion, but we don't agree. I'm sorry that's the case, but it
doesn't
> make me hate you. No one here feels that way, I'm pretty darned
sure.
Thank god for that again. however I'll add a private answer to that,
just to explain that the reasons behind this 'hysteria' are not
totally without causes.
Scarlet.
Doris A Wall
> But I did want to comment of what dlynn said. You know, I'm not sure if I
buy
> the "good writers are ignored because they're not connected" idea.
Honestly.
> Yes, this fandom is HUGE and yes, it can be hard to break in, but I've
seen
> writers come out of nowhere with a brilliant story and have it be received
with
> all the adulation it deserved. Think Nascent, think Reveley, think
hapazard
> method, think Suzanne Schramm. No one knew them from Adam when they first
> posted, but their stories were *good* and they were praised as such.
>
I agree, to a point. Example: I can remember when Alison Kinney first posted
<g>,
and in my ignorance I thought wow, this "new writer" is just wonderful! So I
wrote her with feedback asked to archive her, and because she was, to me, a
new face
I asked her if she knew where to send her work so she could attract more
readers.
'Miss Kinney' said no...and she'd be glad if I circulate it <e.g.> Same
happened with
Paige Caldwell, and again with Penumbra.
But my point is, some newbie's don't know where to send their work, or how
this
whole system works. Even when they are successful, I find myself missing
more and more
because either they aren't showing up at my usual haunts or my ng msgs are
getting eaten etc.
So, I think it's completely plausible that there are exceptional writers out
there who
get missed every day.
> And then there's people like me, whose first stories sucked large boulders
and
> were roundly ignored, as they should have been. (I'm not ashamed to admit
it)
> <g>
>
But you kept writing, I'm guessing, because either you had very supportive
friends
or you clicked with the audience and they encouraged you. I think that in
some
instances, people are too afraid to take a chance on a new name anymore,
they would
rather wait and skip it until they've heard it's good. Which brings us to
the PR aspect.
> Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the
success
> of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
>
Sometimes, maybe not with that intent. But I've read some stories that
received rave reviews and I just didn't dig it. There are some cases where
I see a name attached and I know it will make the rounds. I mean if you are
thanking an archivist by name as your beta, then there is a good chance it's
going to end up in their archive. And there isn't any reason why it
shouldn't,
it's their archive to do with what they please.
I have a small archive, one that tries to cater to the new writer. Does that
always
work? Nope. Because sooner or later that "new writer" grows and they keep
putting out these wonderful stories, so I still archive them. Which, as I've
been told in many, many e-mails, makes me look partial to them. Like I have
this circle of friends and I cater only to them. So that is a case where
people
see this big conspiracy, where there is none.
Do other archives work that way? Who knows, I can tell you it's hard
to NOT archive a story from one of your friends, but I think it's harder to
keep up a charade that you really enjoyed it when you didn't.
But overall, I can see how any group has it's cliques, this one is no
exception.
I think we can all agree on that. Is it fair? Not to everyone, this is life
after all,
but I think the main thing to keep in perspective if your a "diva" or a
"newbie" is
that this folks, is a hobby.
Let's enjoy it while we can.
Kimberly (And no, Doris is not a alias, it's my mother, and her computer
;-)
Tom Mabe
When I first posted, about a year ago, it was a casefile with only UST
called "Goblins and Ghosts". I got a TON of feedback. Poured into the
computer. I thought weehee, this is great. When I post now, I get more of a
handful. I guess folks figure I'm "established" now and so they don't bother
to send feedback, right? That's what I'm telling myself, anyway... :)
I've never won any awards (well, Brandon archived my smut on Fred and
Ginger, but somehow... I'm not as thrilled about being recognized for my
ability to write great porn as you might think, LOL). I don't know Dasha
personally, or really any of the "big" writers here. I'm sorta anti-social,
considering. But I feel my work gets pretty well recognized, and has from
the start. So I don't get as much feedback now as I used to. I also write
darker, longer, more difficult stories than I used to. I haven't written
anything like "Mutual" in so long, I wouldn't know a good Mulderbation fic
if it walked up and smacked me with its giant shlong.
Here's the thing. I am a "professional" writer. It's what I theoretically do
for a "living" (note quotes). And believe it or not, I fully credit this
community and fanfic itself for saving my "career" (again, note quotes). I
had the worst case of writer's block imaginable. Try four, five years. I
wrote a screenplay, which helped move me along, but I couldn't get back into
prose, my first love. I had no self-confidence, no *ear* for it anymore. I
discovered fanfic, and decided to try writing it for fun. The fact that it
wasn't going to be published for money gave me the freedom to relax and get
back into things. The feedback was enormously encouraging. In the end, I was
able to slide back into writing my novel because I was feeling so great
about my fic. Did I get constructive crit? Yes! Did I get slavering praise?
Yes. They're both essential to being a good writer. And without this
community, I wouldn't be writing at all. I'm sure of that.
So keep praising the newbies. Send feedback. Start conversations. Several of
the most valuable friendships in my life right now are with people I met
through fic. Fanfic, without question, changed my life. Do I still write for
feedback? You betcha. Would I have quit writing if I got a mean letter?
Nope. I got one ("I couldn't even finish this drivel") on my second fic. I
think I'm rambling now. Time for the group hug...
Jess Mabe
WickdZoot <wick...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000613091630...@ng-fz1.aol.com...
> >
> >Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the
success
> >of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
> >
>
Tom Mabe
> I took that statement not to mean that 40 is old; but that because
> Mulder IS about 40 he should be written as a mature man and not a 17
> year old. What's wrong with reminding writers that Mulder is 40? He
> is. Made perfect sense to me.
>
> Regards,
> Trajan
Well, I think the witches were reminding us all rather patronizingly, not
that Mulder is a grown man with the prowess of a grown man, but that at 40,
he shouldn't be able to get it up repeatedly. Now, as we all know, there are
20 year-old men who can't get it up and keep it up and 40 year-old men who
can go for hours. That's what offended the women earlier in the thread. The
idea that *just because* he's 40, he automatically can't do the things
fanfic writers have him doing.
I personally think he'd be able to screw like a bunny after the initial
first time, which would, as we all know, last about three thrusts. I mean,
c'mon, at least five *years*? The guy would come before she even had her bra
off. What he did after that, though, is fair game :).
Jess
Lynn Ditto
"Teddi Litman" <dayb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3945E44B...@ix.netcom.com...
>
>
Just like
> writers get a certain reputation, there are certain
> *readers* I have come to generally trust in their opinions
> of a story. When certain people go wild over a story, I
> know that story usually is worth checking out.
I can ditto that. In my short time on this ng, and in the short time I have
for reading the stories posted here, I use this shortcut alot. Laziness on
my part, I guess, but it's easier for me to seek out stories with responses
from the people I respect in this community. Some of them are authors I
like; some are readers who have the same impeccable taste that I do. <eg> I
think that this 'trust' comes from observing, over time, the personalities
and attitudes of posters. It goes without saying that I will trust the
opinions of someone who is fair, pleasant, and yes, humorous. These people
have earned my respect by their behavior, thus their opinions carry more
weight.
That said, if a new writer were to ask me to read a story, via email or a
posting on the ng, I will give it a go. Encouraging new authors should be a
given here. It takes more nerve than I have to be willing to post a story
for the world to see, and I applaud everyone who hits the Send button. My
fanfic addiction salutes you!
Lynn
lee burwasser
[[ snip ]]
> Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the success
> of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
Type of story probably has more effect than either. Some stories are just plain
niche market: few people bother with them, but those that do, like them a lot.
Such stories are never going to win widespread acclaim or garner awards; if you
want that, write MSR or slash or some other popular market. Such stories, if
reasonably well written, do accumulate a handful of "good work" notes.
Lee Burwasser
*working stiff--don't blame me for policy*
Dasha K.
>friends
>or you clicked with the audience and they encouraged you.
Actually, I didn't know a soul in fanfic and I got virtually no feedback. But
instead of getting discouraged, I decided that I *had* to get better. I took
it as a personal challenge. I read a lot of fanfic and thought about what
worked and what didn't. I worked harder on creating original scenarios. I
thought about how to write decent dialogue. For me, it was get better at this
writing thing or die trying...
That's the attitude new readers need to have, IMO. It's a learing experience.
You only got one feedback letter? Aim for two next time. You don't feel like
you wrote the story you wanted to tell? Work harder on the next one. Try to
make each story a bit better than the last.
And I don't necessarily define success by the amount of feedback or recs you
get. Some of my favorite stories have gotten pitifully small amounts of
feedback.
Doris A Wall
> That's the attitude new readers need to have, IMO. It's a learing
experience.
> You only got one feedback letter? Aim for two next time. You don't feel
like
> you wrote the story you wanted to tell? Work harder on the next one. Try
to
> make each story a bit better than the last.
>
> And I don't necessarily define success by the amount of feedback or recs
you
> get. Some of my favorite stories have gotten pitifully small amounts of
> feedback.
>
Now, that is an entire thread by itself! Feedback, the lost art of sending,
returning,
appreciating, etc...what am I forgetting?
Feedback is wonderful, but I don't think that's what dlynn was talking
about.
I think the problem is in the fact that people are more ready to click on a
work
by an established author, then someone they have never heard from or don't
know, so feedback wouldn't be sent anyway.
You know what I mean? Talent is talent, fame (in whatever sense) is
relative, and
sometimes it just takes a while to find your groove. But it does help to
have people
who are established to help you along the way.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, everyone has a different
audience, with as large
as this community is, there is a place for everyone.
Kimberly (whose meds are wearing off...)
Lisby
"Dasha K." wrote:
> But I did want to comment of what dlynn said. You know, I'm not sure if I buy
> the "good writers are ignored because they're not connected" idea.
I don't either, to be frank. Yes, I will read whatever certain writers who have
pleased me in the past write, but not to the exclusion of anyone. I'll read
anything that appeals to me right through to the end and if I've really enjoyed
it, I'll do my best to promote it on IOHO, no matter who the author is-- known,
unknown, whoever.
> Honestly.
> Yes, this fandom is HUGE and yes, it can be hard to break in, but I've seen
> writers come out of nowhere with a brilliant story and have it be received with
> all the adulation it deserved. Think Nascent, think Reveley, think hapazard
> method, think Suzanne Schramm. No one knew them from Adam when they first
> posted, but their stories were *good* and they were praised as such.
I think that around here the cream tends to rise to the top of its own momentum.
The authors you mentioned are prime examples.
>
> Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the success
> of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of others.
I think it has little to do with "politics" and a lot to do with wanting to
further friendships. It's only natural that friends applaud friends. Sometimes it
is difficult not to applaud without damaging the friendship, but I don't think
that leads certain people to be made into "unworthy gods" very often around here.
I've got to stress though that self-promotion is important. You've got to get your
own story on the lists and sites they need to go to. Don't expect anyone else to
do that for you.
Lisby
IOHO
http//home.earthlink.net/~iwonder
Dasha K.
>your
>own story on the lists and sites they need to go to. Don't expect anyone else
>to
>do that for you.
Yep-- I have to agree here. Not the obnoxious "Oooh, look at me, read my fic,
don't write me feedback because I'm a mysterious entity feedback" but common
sense stuff.
I knew a new writer a while back who was complaining that her stories weren't
getting any feedback. I asked her which lists she was posting to and she said
just ATXC. Turned out she wasn't even putting "New" in the header so it would
get forwarded to Ephemeral. She had a personal site and when I asked her if
she'd written Shari and Kris at Chronicle X to have her site listed, she said,
"What's that?"
With a few simple steps, she was able to bring her writing to a *lot* more
people.
Boondoggler
> I didn't mean to sound ungrateful; the feedback I *have* received
> has helped tremendously. And I don't know what the numbers mean;
> I haven't seen a definitive poll on amount and type of feedback.
> But, while I have gotten some helpful emails, most are short and
> sweet. And, while I certainly do appreciate those 1 or 2 line
> responses that tell me, "I enjoyed your story; it rocked," or, "I
> don't know why, I just didn't like your story," they don't tell
> me *how* the story functioned to please them, or to displease
> them. I realize even those short reponses take time, and few
> people have the time to offer a lengthy critique. But,
> theoretically, of course it would be helpful to have more
> feedback, because that would mean a corresponding increase in
> emails consisting of "constructive criticism." I certainly don't
> blame the community for not rushing to email me en masse; I don't
> know that my vignette warranted that. But, again theoretically,
> it would be nice to know precisely *why* it didn't.
>
Here's some advice from a reader. Let the readers know what you want.
Make it clear in no uncertain terms that you want the good *and* the
bad. Ask specific questions. The longest feedback I've ever written
was because someone included specific questions after a fic.
Questions of any type work for me. For example:
Did the characterization work?
When did you realize that Mulder was dead?
What didn't work for you and why? (Not specific, but it gets the idea
across that you want to improve.)
Did the dialogue sound in character?
Did the POV work for you?
Was the casefile too complex or too simple?
Did the foreshadowing work or did it give away too much of the ending?
You as the writer are the one with the best knowledge of what you were
trying to accomplish with the fic. If you want to know if that
particular experiment worked, ask away.
--
Boondoggler
"You're young, you're crazy, you're in bed and you've got knives.
So shit happens." - Angelina Jolie
http://members.aol.com/Boondog8/atxf.html
Michaela
>stories be read at all? This is where I think that there is a bit of truth
>to the perception that an unknown writer isn't going to be noticed -- and
>therefore their efforts will not be "successful." There are so many
>stories posted in this forum that it's often necessary to sift through them
>before deciding which to read. I do this all the time.
I think your theory has a lot of merit and God knows I'm one of those folks who
sifts through and usually starts reading what I recognize first. But whenever
this discussion comes up, there's one thing that stops me from completely
buying this theory.
And that's this: There are still a lot of people here in the community who have
time to read pretty much EVERYTHING, doesn't matter one bit who wrote it. (And
yes, let's take a moment to sit in envy of those people. I love these people. I
want to BE these people. <g>) Even if it's everything in just one or two
genres, it seems like we've got one for pretty much every genre, and for pretty
much every taste. And it's been my experience that these folks, in particular,
thrill to the possibility that they might find a new voice out there, a new
author who has yet to be "discovered" or whatever you wanna call it.
The most wonderful thing about these people is that they TALK. They give heads
up to those of us who are looking for a place to start when it's fic reading
time and there's a huge inbox of fic staring you in the face. If they liked it,
they'll tell you. They'll tell you on atxc, or Scullyfic, or the Haven or any
other place where fic Philes comes together. And, it should be noted, they do
not necessarily run web sites...they're just vocal wherever they feel the need
to be vocal.
These people should be worshipped. <g> I love them.
So I eventually learn which of these wonderful vocalists share some of my same
tastes, interests, general love of fic and whose recommendations always seem to
point me to something I end up liking. I personally rely on many of these
people for a number of genres.
And trust me, if it's even a *reasonably* good story by these people's
standards, you WILL hear about it. I don't care who wrote it, what it's about,
who the pairing is, who allegedly put on a sock to write it, who beta read it
or whether or not John <dreaded last name edacted for fear he'll show up>
thinks the person will fail miserably as a professional writer because they're
wasting their time writing fanfic. Word WILL get around. And since all of these
individuals have varying tastes, many, many stories by many, many authors are
going to be talked about.
And that's why I love this little corner of the Internet called XF fanficdom.
Michaela
*** * *** * *** * *** * *** * *** * ***
"Every female point-of-entry needs to know that the penis comes in peace."
-- Rachel, "The Story of Us"
Michaela
>was because someone included specific questions after a fic.
>Questions of any type work for me. For example:
>Did the characterization work?
>When did you realize that Mulder was dead?
>What didn't work for you and why? (Not specific, but it gets the idea
>across that you want to improve.)
>Did the dialogue sound in character?
>Did the POV work for you?
>Was the casefile too complex or too simple?
>Did the foreshadowing work or did it give away too much of the ending?
This is brilliant. I LOVE this. Not only would such specific feedback be
incredibly helpful to me as a writer looking to hone the craft, I know that as
a reader, I would actually find it fun to respond to!
Sometimes, when it comes time to write that feedback note after reading fic, I
wonder...what does this author want to hear from me? Does (s)he just want to
know if I liked it or not, does (s)he want specific details on what I liked, is
(s)he at all interested in what I think might need a little more work? Is just
a "Hi! Great story! Bye!" all (s)he is looking for, or a lengthy essay? Or is
either okay?
Feedback requests like that described above really would help me understand
what the author is looking for when (s)he posts that story. And I'm more than
happy to deliver that if I can!
Michaela, planning to put this into practice next time I write a
story...whenever that might be...don't look at me, I'm on sabbatical <g>
Kipler
nirvana. I learned this in a writing workshop once; none of us knew what to
say to each other so one bright young guy typed out "thought questions" for us
to consider when we critiqued him. Worked wonders for him and for us!
I tossed some questions up on the web after my last story was posted, and it
was AMAZING how much response I got - a lot of which started with, "I don't
usually write feedback because I don't know what to say but I figured I'd
answer these questions..." So I think the "hints" can push feedbacl-tentative
folks over the edge into feedback-confidence.
--Kipler
Teddi Litman
sylvia wrote:
>
>
> Another note, related to what you said about the reception of my
> vignette on this NG. I am a nutcase, and awkward with
> technology. I posted the wrong file of my story here, a draft
> file. And, while it was a version close to the final copy, it
> wasn't *it*, and I made a note of it on the thread telling people
> the final version was that posted to Ephemeral. Yes, I take full
> blame for my mistake, and yes, it's a lot to ask people to read
> the one at Ephemeral instead. But my explanatory note tends to
> be ingnored, and I sound like I'm whining when I ask people to
> notice it. But isn't it in my interest to present my story in
> the best possible light? Or is this a breach of etiquette? How
> does one go about handling such a situation?
>
You repost the story on this ng with a REV before the title.
If you wish, you can explain the reasons and/or the extent
of the revision in an introductory statement. (Some writers
post a revision just to correct some minor spelling mistakes
for archiving purposes and some have made significant
changes.) If it's something I liked, and the revision is more than
merely correction of a few typos, I read the revision.
I personally don't regularly check out Ephemeral. I had no
idea about the final version.
Teddi
Tesla
previous thread, I was amused at all the squawks about rudeness concealed
under a pen-name. Especially when some of the rudest people on the group
write under a pen-name. Or e-name, as the case may be.
--
"Some days it just doesn't pay to chew through the restraints."--Anonymous
Circe
> The great fictalk flamewar illustrated this all too vividly.
Which one?
Sorry, couldn't resist, having survived a few of those, myself.
--
Circe XFW #32
I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused.
Brandon Ray
The point isn't to know the real world identity of people -- it's
well-established that some people just don't want their true names identified
with the fanfic community. The point is that the children running that site
HAVE fanfic identities, and deliberately choose to conceal them. It can't be
that they fear criticism from the people they're attacking; that's happening
anyway. The only reason I can imagine for it is that they know what they're
doing is childish and shameful, and they don't want their fanfic friends and
acquaintances to know that it's them.
They're probably also afraid that if their victims knew their fanfic
identities, we would stoop to their level and dissect their work. After all,
that's what THEY would do, if the situation were reversed, and they probably
lack the imagination to consider that some people are above such things.
Tesla wrote:
--
Most of my first dates end with a restraining order -- Oscar, "Night Court"
==========================
I promise -- there are no restraining orders keeping you away from my fanfic:
http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyStories.html
And if you want a really *fun* first date, check out my page of recs:
http://www.avalon.net/~publius/MyRecs.html
BUC252
- when I first read the page, the part I read was the profiles of the witches
themselves. I found them to be humorous and not insulting if you weren't
looking to take it that way.
I have, however, had the opportunity now to examine their other areas, and I
admit, I'm shocked. Critiquing somebody's story - even if their view of the
world doesn't agree with yours - is one thing, but to criticize them personally
is quite another, and in my book totally uncalled for. Yes, professional
critics can be scathing, and professional writers put up with those all the
time, but when have you seen a single critic attack a person's personality,
hobbies, or occupation. It's pitiful that they seem to get off on this. I
presume that is what they get out of it, anyway, since there's really nothing
else that could benefit.
I guess the world holds a lot of people who seem to think that they can make
them feel better about themselves by demeaning other people. The KKK comes to
mind along with the Witches. Pretty scary, isn't it?
- Mary : )
KassXF
>further friendships. It's only natural that friends applaud friends.
>Sometimes it
>is difficult not to applaud without damaging the friendship, but I don't
>think
>that leads certain people to be made into "unworthy gods" very often around
>here.
>
>
For the most part I would definitely agree. However, since '96, I have
observed certain groups who *do* seem to play politics--of varying persuasions,
btw, I'm not singling out romos, noromos, slashers or gen writers.
The great fictalk flamewar illustrated this all too vividly.
Regardless of those groups, ultimately, I would agree that it's the reader's
perception of a story that tells us whether or not it was a success in terms of
sharing our vision. No matter what a 'clique' might decide or say, a story
must stand on its own merit with the audience.
Frankly, I'm very nonconnected in the XF community by choice, except for a few
good friends, and I still get an amazing amount of feedback on my XF fic, both
gen and slash, particularly when you consider it's been more than a year since
I, er, went on XF sabbatical.
Over in my new playground, I avoid mailing lists and post to a web page, and
the same sort of response takes place. One person's experience does not a
trend make, necessarily, but I think it argues that Lisby and others are quite
correct. Connections ain't everything.
The pot has to stand on its own legs, and that's more important than your
particular personal coterie.
kass
cratkinson
<<Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the
success of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of
others.>>
I'm sure that politics play a part, to a degree, but when I posted my
first story in January, I was a complete unknown on this newsgroup. I'd
lurked and read for a while, but never posted. My story was received
with a gratifying amount of feedback - both public and private. My
second story was also well received, judging by feedback and recs and
the number of people "keeping an eye out for my name".
So people *do* read stuff by new authors. I can personally attest to
that.
I think that it's quite obvious that there are favorites. However,
having read their work, I know why. They deliver. I hardly think that
their political newsgroup connections <g> would carry them too far if
they didn't.
And remember, everyone's a newbie at some point! No one was born into
popularity in this community.
$.02. Cha-ching!
-Christine
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Kipler
popularity in this community.>>
Yes, exactly. And I think people overestimate the degree to which most authors
are "known." I suspect that, outside a couple treasured friendships, most of
us are pretty isolated in our geeky computer rooms. <g>
--Kipler
Dasha K.
>sites to be listed!
Nope-- on the Personals page, just about anyone can be listed. Am I right,
Shari?
DBKate
>
><<Do others really think that politics/PR really play a big part in the
>success of a story? I'd be honestly curious to hear the perceptions of
>others.>>
Let me just say up front there's so much logrolling on
this ng, the DEC should be called in. We spend half
our time writing fanfic, the other half writing glowing
public "blurbs" for our pals (who, in turn, do the same
thing for us.)
And while this looks a bit crass and unfair, it honestly
has a limited effectiveness in getting people to a) read
your fic, and virtually none at all in getting them to
b) *like* your fic.
People like what they like and I, nor anyone else is
going to convince them otherwise with my drooling
review of whichever story. Readers are smart, smarter
than a lot of authors give them credit for.
The most a public slurpee buddy/buddy fest can do
is increase the name recognition of a fic, helping
to get bodies to the page. But, if the fic itself doesn't
deliver, that's where the lovefest will end and I'm
pretty sure both the "reviewer" and the "author" will
be taken with a slightly larger grain of salt next
posting time around.
Kate
~~~~~~
acid for a new century
THE ACID DESK - June, 2000
http://members.aol.com/dbkate2/acid_11.txt
nobody
Kim
A few personal observations:
(1) A social friend does not automatically equal a person whose fic you admire.
I have several friends I like a lot as people but I don't read their fic. I
don't pretend to. I wish them all the success in the world with their writing
but it doesn't appeal to me. And vice versa is also, I suspect, true.
(2) Even among my close friends whose work I usually like a lot, there are one
or two fics I feel are clunkers. I usually don't comment. If they want my
opinion, or help, they can ask. I don't feel my friendship with them requires I
like all their work, or vice versa. That would be insincere, and bullshit like
that poisons a friendship.
(3) The outcry of "I can't trust the rec people anymore because they rec their
friends" is crap Sorry, nobody is disqualified from writing good fic that
appeals to a rec-site's sensibilities because of their status as a friend or
acquaintance. If you think the rec-sites lack integrity, start your own and be
*sure* to *never* rec one of your friends' works.
(4) This fandom is the heaven or hell that you make it. I've done both,
sometimes at the same time. There's no shortage of human failings and there's
no shortage of really nice people. If you want to hate it, there's ample
reason, and if you want to love it, there's reason for that, too.
*~*~*~*~*~*
Kim
Journ...@aol.com
http://journeytox.simplenet.com
http://www.houseofgentlemen.com/home.html
"I'm in your hands." Skinner, The X-Files, SR819
"Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind." Rudyard Kipling
Shari
>listed at Chronical X, much in the same way as fic
>is selected for inclusion at the site.
>I never knew that a writers could ask for their
>sites to be listed!
Well now you do. <g> No, we've always been willing to put up any personal
author page on the Personals or any speciality archive on the Classifieds. All
we need is to know they exist and where to find them.
It's *because* the archive of stories is chosen specifically that we're more
than happy to list sites on the Personals and Classifieds.
So let this be everyone's notice -- if you have a personal fanfic page, send me
your name you want on the Personals and the URL for your site. Please, do not
contact me to list your page if it's mostly filled with sounds, pictures, and
whatnot. I'm looking for direct URLs to the pages devoted mostly to fanfic.
If you run a speciality archive or you know of one not listed on the
Classifieds, send me the name of it and the URL. We'll get them up as soon as
possible. : )
Shari
Want to read an amazing novel? Check out "The House of Gentle Men" by Kathy
Hepinstall, available at Amazon.Com. It'll leave you pining for more.
http://www.houseofgentlemen.com
Chronicle X -- http://chroniclex.simplenet.com
updated 5/6
KassXF
>
>Sorry, couldn't resist, having survived a few of those, myself.
<snorgling> Good point, Circe. I meant the one that spilled over here and
featured Gil Trevizo as the main course at the barbecue. <g>
kass
KassXF
>their
>friends" is crap Sorry, nobody is disqualified from writing good fic that
>appeals to a rec-site's sensibilities because of their status as a friend or
>acquaintance. If you think the rec-sites lack integrity, start your own and
>be
>*sure* to *never* rec one of your friends' works.
I guess I'm confused, because I didn't see any outcry. I have no hesitation
about reccing fics written by people I consider friends if I like the fic.
I've recced fics by people I don't know from Adam, and I've even recced fics by
people I knew only slightly and wasn't terribly fond of.
I don't think anyone said that the rec sites lacked integrity, either. A rec
site is simply that, an expression of opinion, and I think we all know that. I
think several people have addressed that by mentioning that when they get to
know another person's tastes, etc, they know whether or not a rec is going to
meet their particular tastes.
Yeah, I think Kate may be right, there is a lot of logrolling, but big deal.
Ultimately, fic stands on its own, and that's what Kate said as well. No
matter how many people tout a story, if it's trite or dull or badly written,
it's not going to be a 'success', and I don't think anyone has posted any
opinion disagreeing with that concept.
<shrugging> YMMV, but that's what I've been seeing.
kass
Ally112038
>that.
Me too. I was persuaded to post by a good friend of mine after wrestling with
crippling self-doubt for about 3 years.
The amount of private and personal e-mail I recieved left me slightly
shell-shocked. As did the goodwill and encouragement from members of this ng.
The only regret I have is that I didn't start doing this years ago. I've had
so much fun in the few months I've been attempting this stuff, much of it due
to the support from the readers. :-)
Ally
KassXF
>authors
>are "known." I suspect that, outside a couple treasured friendships, most of
>us are pretty isolated in our geeky computer rooms. <g>
>
Exactly. You may have slurpy buddy/buddy recs, but good grief--it doesn't
make anyone 'famous' any more than winning a Spooky does. It just gives us
warm fuzzies when we get recced--unless you really are completely detached from
your fic--and makes us feel good when a lot of people show they liked and
appreciated it by voting in any awards.
kass
KassXF
to review when you aren't. At least for me. YMMV.
kass
Kim
That's because I'm mostly responding, and airing as a public issue for
discussion, to something told to me in email. Sans names, sans quotes. So,
without access to my email, no, you wouldn't see an outcry.
The issue came up when I suggested to people that they could avoid
contamination by bad fic, which seemed to offend them merely by existing, by
simply going to rec sites, or finding someone whose taste they respected and
asking for recs. The rebuttal was that rec sites had turned into "Rec your
buddy."
I find that contention without merit, myself. I find Lisby, Sparky and Shari to
be people whose taste I trust and whose friendships do not seem to be the
deciding factor in making fic recs.
A lot of whining by Witches, a lot of wincing about bad fic, a lot of kvetching
about cliques. Yawn. Nothing worth my time here. I'll make iced tea and write a
little.
KassXF
>without access to my email, no, you wouldn't see an outcry.
>
<confused> Okay, I thought you said there was a public outcry.
>The issue came up when I suggested to people that they could avoid
>contamination by bad fic, which seemed to offend them merely by existing, by
>simply going to rec sites, or finding someone whose taste they respected and
>asking for recs. The rebuttal was that rec sites had turned into "Rec your
>buddy."
No, I think what Dasha asked was do people really believe that PR affects what
stories will be a success. The consensus of opinion appears to be no, in the
end it doesn't. I guess I'm still confused, because I didn't see anyone's post
suggesting that *all* rec sites were "Rec your buddy" sites which is quite
patently and quite obviously not true. Hell, I've been recced on Sparky's site
and I don't even KNOW Sparky.
>A lot of whining by Witches, a lot of wincing about bad fic, a lot of
>kvetching
>about cliques.
First of all, I don't see any witches whining here, unless they're using socks,
but most of the comments appear to have been posted by people whose names are
quite regular and familiar. Second, I don't think responding to Dasha's post
honestly can strictly be termed kvetching about cliques. Commenting on their
existence, sure; when we observe that the sun has risen, we're hardly
kvetching.
I think perhaps you're misreading some posts.
kass
Kim
><confused> Okay, I thought you said there was a public outcry.
I used the word "outcry" not the word "public."
Bliss further said:
>No, I think what Dasha asked...... <snip>
> I guess I'm still confused, because I didn't see anyone's >post
>suggesting that....... <snip>
>I think perhaps you're misreading some posts.
And I think I am responding to what was in my email and airing the issue for
public discussion.
I said that previously.
I did not say I was responding to Dasha or to anyone else who has posted
publicly. If so, I think I would most likely have (1) quoted them (2) addressed
them. Instead I responded briefly to Joyce's post, and added my own tangential
discussion.
It seemed as good a place as any for inserting the information I had. I was
simply tossing it out there for public discussion.
So you discussed it.
I guess that's all.
WickdZoot
little off.
Kim said:
>I used the word "outcry" not the word "public."
>
Yes, I went back and ascertained that I had indeed made an assumption that the
outcry to which you referred was public.
Kim further said:
>And I think I am responding to what was in my email and airing the issue for
>public discussion.
>
>I said that previously.
Yes, I understood that quite clearly with regard to the outcry issue. However,
it did appear that you were responding in the thread where 'PR' and story
success were both being discussed, and you addressed the issue of buddy recs,
which Cici had specifically mentioned. Obviously, since I don't have access to
your private email discussions, I linked your post to the thread in error. I
certainly apologize for making the assumption that your comments regarding
friends and recs was at all related to the thread in question.
And frankly, I'm still confused about your comment about Witches whining, but
perhaps you have some private knowledge on who said witches are, and therefore
were addressing *that* rather than the public discussion because you recognized
some of their posts. <shrugging>
Whatever. Air away.
kass