Depends what point we're trying for. by
Huinesoron
on 2013-05-31 15:45:00 UTC
Reply
If the point we want to make on our FAQ for other people to read is that we have zero consideration for bad writers' feelings, someone like Tviokh is the person we ought to quote.
If we want to convey that we have zero tolerance for bad writing, then we will want more directed anger, such as saying 'No matter what your circumstances, by posting your story on the internet you have put it on display, and accepted the responsibility for its quality'. This is essentially a rewording to get away from the specific targetting.
If, as a third option, we want to give the message that even writers with difficulties can write well - and that therefore, since you are posting on the internet, we assume you are willing to make the extra effort that might be required - then something like what h.o.v. suggested would work nicely, though I can't contribute anything specific to it.
And finally, if we want to tell people that having a learning disability or allied trade is a free pass to not do whatever it is you have trouble doing, we can simply say so.
Personally I think we ought to be aiming for 3, with a side-order of 2 ('That aside, if your story is terrible, we /will/ tell you, and yes, we might still PPC it'), and a hint of 4 ('We are happy to offer constructive criticism to authors who actually want to improve their writing, and in many cases, members of the PPC will even offer to beta-read for you!'). And I think if anyone is operating along the lines of 1, they need to seriously consider whether they're in the right community.
hS