Subject: Well, then. Now I look like a right nob.
Author:
Posted on: 2017-01-20 11:55:00 UTC
iammisc1@gmail.com is the email.
Don't, er. Slap anything.
I severely overestimated my ability to get a working clickable email.
Here's hoping Board-skill doesn't equal beta-skill, oy?
Specifically, betas are needed for a short (three and a bit-ish pages) interlude set in Rudi's pub. We're mainly looking for the regular SPaG, story-flow and general polish stuff; knowledge of Lord of the Rings would be nice but isn't necessary, as is willingness to wrap one's head around multiversal metaphysics.
Interested parties should post their email so we will be able to share the GDoc with them.
I might be a bit slow to respond, but I can take a look at it.
Two betas should be plenty for a short, straightforward fic. Thanks for the offer!
Can you please take a look at the concrit from your last two missions? I've been trying to catch you but you always disappear before you see anything.
and I think I responded to it. I honestly don't know why you keep saying that I haven't.
Often, you superficially answer questions, but don't address the issues in your writing which they refer to. For instance, if I asked you to clarify what you meant somewhere, you would give me an explanation, but you wouldn't revise the story to include that information.
To be fair, I was inexperienced when I beta-read your Permission piece, and a lot of my suggestions weren't very good -- I kept trying to make your story into something it wasn't, rather than helping you make it into a better version of itself (I'm sorry, and I've learned better since then; please don't write me off as a potential beta). But often you wouldn't reply to my comments even to say that you didn't think my idea would work, or didn't see how to implement it.
I can tell you have a hard time with writing or something like that -- your posts on the Board are usually quite brief, and you have someone else help you with Wiki editing -- so maybe it's not like you to have huge, long discussions with your betas. But if you want to be a writer, you have to be able to work with someone to help you revise. And this is something you will get better at with practice, like every other skill you're working on as a writer (and every other skill, period).
--Key has struggled with taking feedback all her life, and is getting better at it
I'll try better next time, but both of the two linked sotires are dead and I won't be working on them.
From what I understand, you prefer clear and blunt feedback, and I will attempt to provide it. If, from your perspective, I am being vague or unclear, please tell me what you were uncertain about so that I can clarify it. If something I write below appears rude, that is not my intention.
One of my main concerns is that your expressed attitude towards constructive criticism and feedback is not the attitude expected of PPCers. Several people have provided you with critical feedback on your PPC writing, which included suggestions for improvement and often indicated that your stories had significant structural problems that required revision.
You have not (from what I can see) responded to this this concrit in the matter expected of you as a PPCer. There are (speaking generally) several possible responses to concrit we consider appropriate. (This is not written down anywhere, as far as I know. I'm attempting to imprecisely write down my view of social consensus.)
The first is to use the feedback by making edits and improvements to the work being commented on. This is effectively obligatory for unintentional typos and other minor errors. If you use someone's concrit, it is expected that you leave a message indicating this and thanking them for their efforts. If the concrit indicates a major structural issue, and you intend to resolve this issue through heavy editing, you are expected to take your story down until you have completed your changes. As a specific point, if you are told that something is unclear from the text, responding with a clarifying comment (but not changing the story) is not sufficient.
A second option is to discuss and possibly disagree with the concrit. Since writing is a somewhat subjective exercise, there will be times that you will receive concrit that you do not think you should implement, or which you will otherwise disagree with. When this occurs, you should still respond to the criticism and explain (to a reasonable extent) why you disagree with it, ask for clarification, or otherwise discuss the feedback you received.
A third option, which generally applies to large-scale issues that would be difficult to resolve but that are only minor problems (such as being slightly over/under-descriptive) is to acknowledge the feedback and apply it to future work. However, this would not be a reasonable response to the comments you have received on your previous mission, which point out much more serious structural issues.
(In addition, if a response includes multiple items of criticism, you should make some response to all of them.)
The main reason for these expectations is that the PPC is a community dedicated to good writing and improvement. You are expected to engage with the feedback you receive, and to make edits and revisions even after publication. (For example, in this mission, Neshomeh resolved a canon error four years after publication.) This expectation does not generally extend to full rewrites long after the fact, although they may be advised in your case. Your apparent refusal to do this ("the two linked stories are dead and I won't be working on them") is not an expected response. (If this was a highly abbreviated way to withdraw those stories from the PPC universe, please indicate that you are doing this.) Similarly, replying to concrit by simply indicating you have read it is not a correct response.
There have also been concerns about your interactions with your beta readers. In general, you are expected to engage with your betas' feedback like you would with concrit. You are also expected not to publish work until you have resolved your betas' concerns (or reached a state of mutual reasonable disagreement). Not doing this indicates an apparent lack of interest in cultivating good writing skills on your part, which is something I am concerned about.
Furthermore, you have displayed (though you seem to not be doing this as much recently) a pattern of posting on the Board for a day or two and then disappearing for a long period of time. While hiatuses are a normal part of PPC life, you should at least keep an eye on your own threads, and respond to those who reply to you as appropriate. This is especially the case with mission and interlude threads. Posting a mission and then (from out perspective) ignoring the replies is not the behavior we want you to exhibit. It shows that you are not acting as a member of the PPC community, and the PPC is fundamentally a community that writes in a shared universe, not a shared universe with an attached community.
There are no formal consequences if you keep acting this way. However, there are likely to be informal social consequences. That is, people will become annoyed with you because you are not respecting community norms. You may begin finding it more difficult to find beta readers if you continue to develop a reputation as being difficult to work with. Your work may go unread. You may stop receiving feedback because people will not want to waste their time giving concrit that will not be applied. This is not inevitable, and will (almost certainly) not occur if you change your behavior to better align with our expectations.
I hope that my attempt at writing down the unspoken conventions of the PPC will help you work with us better, and I look forward to reading your future writing.
- Tomash
As for not disappearing, it is hard to get out of the house to access the internet.
BTW, anyone who hasn't emailed me about betas, I'm not committing to checking in next week. My medicine is too expensive.
My post was intended to clearly outline what "trying harder" would look like, and what you were expected to do. I am confused by why you believed the subject line you used was a good response to my post, especially since it comes across as angry shouting.
I think one significant action you can take that will make it clear you intend to reform and try harder to act appropriately is to go back to your old missions and revise them, taking into account the feedback and concrit you have received. This will also significantly improve your reputation within the PPC. (If you feel that you are unable to revise your previous work, unpublishing it is a valid alternative solution.)
To put it another way, "next time" isn't quite enough. We'd like to see "this time" as well, since it is possible.
Tomash
What Tomash is saying is genuine constructive criticism, and you are reacting to it with hostility, shouting (capslock subject lines, for example), and ignoring the gist of what he's trying to tell you.
If you feel constructive criticism is an attack, then why are you writing for the PPC, where we're pretty much based on giving and receiving concrit for our writings?
You have a responsibility to make sure your writings are up to snuff. Not just because it's general common sense, but it's also included in the Constitution. Section 5, Article 24 specifically mentions PPCers writing bad fanfiction, but the point of Permission is to check and make sure writers for our shared universe are contributing quality pieces, which you are not only failing to do, but are also refusing to improve upon.
Yes, you say you'll try better next time, but when your words say you don't care about improving your past work ("both of the two linked sotires are dead and I won't be working on them.") and then ignore what Tomash says save for shouting at him, it's a little concerning to us.
If this is feeling like an attack to you, may I suggest you take some time and think about why we're telling you this? We want to see you improve as a writer, but we can't do that if you don't make an effort to do so.
. . . But in examining the responses to your last two missions, you've never specifically responded to any of the concrit you've received.
I'm looking here and here, if that helps.
You generally don't respond to specific questions and vanish awfully quickly after reviews are posted. We'd like to help you improve, it's just difficult to do so if you've already run away.
For example, when someone points out issues in the mission, it's usually a good idea to take their advice under consideration, then either alter the text or give specific reasons why that doesn't work for your mission.
Give that email a good old slap (not a click. Slap your mouse as hard as you can. That'll get the best results, I assure you.)
I mean, if it's three pages, I reckon I could sort that pretty quickly.
Unless the multiversal thing is supposed to hint at metafiction, and this story will take fifty years to go through, while technically only being three and a bit-ish pages.
I'll probably take fifty years and a bit to sort it, if that's the case.
iammisc1@gmail.com is the email.
Don't, er. Slap anything.
I severely overestimated my ability to get a working clickable email.
Here's hoping Board-skill doesn't equal beta-skill, oy?
I'll gladly look over this soon (I expect to be available no later than this weekend)