Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine

[Jamesaritchie]

For those of you who write mystery shorts, as of yesterday, Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine has gone paperless with submissions. You can find the new writer's guidelines here: http://www.themysteryplace.com/eqmm/guidelines/

No word yet on whether Alfred Hitchcock's Mystery Magazine will follow suit.

[stormie]

Finally! Thanks for the info.

[AlwaysJuly]

Booya! Thanks for the info.

[Lost World]

I have subbed a few times to AHMM, which is sure to follow suit, and this does not make me happy. I'll wager that written submissions cut down on the amount of material submitted to a publication, as they have to be prepared carefully and paid for. Now the writers who were too lazy to go to the post office will be just a click away, the editors will have more slush to wade through, and the response times will grow longer. Bound to happen eventually, but I'm not thrilled about it.

[Jamesaritchie]

I have subbed a few times to AHMM, which is sure to follow suit, and this does not make me happy. I'll wager that written submissions cut down on the amount of material submitted to a publication, as they have to be prepared carefully and paid for. Now the writers who were too lazy to go to the post office will be just a click away, the editors will have more slush to wade through, and the response times will grow longer. Bound to happen eventually, but I'm not thrilled about it.


I tend to agree. I've talked to several editors who have gone electronic submissions, and while some say not much changed, others say that the number of submissions almost tripled once word got around.

At best, it means more work for the editor, and slower response times. At worst, it means getting way behind on reading submissions, and rejecting each story quickly, and without giving each the same chance a paper submission received.

We'll see how it goes.

[Gray Rose]

At best, it means more work for the editor, and slower response times. At worst, it means getting way behind on reading submissions, and rejecting each story quickly, and without giving each the same chance a paper submission received.


At best, e-subs give those of us who are not middle class (or living in the US) a better chance at the submission game.

[eqb]

At best, e-subs give those of us who are not middle class (or living in the US) a better chance at the submission game.

QFT.

[Polenth]

I have subbed a few times to AHMM, which is sure to follow suit, and this does not make me happy. I'll wager that written submissions cut down on the amount of material submitted to a publication, as they have to be prepared carefully and paid for. Now the writers who were too lazy to go to the post office will be just a click away, the editors will have more slush to wade through, and the response times will grow longer. Bound to happen eventually, but I'm not thrilled about it.

The electronic system means you can reject at the click of a button and people can check they're in the queue without sending queries. My replies from Asimov's have been much faster via the electronic system (counting time they had the story only, not mailing times). So even if they do get more submissions, they can also process them faster.

EQMM is using the same submission system as Asimov's. I'm sure the editors of the two magazines talked about it before making a decision. They wouldn't have gone ahead with it if the Asimov's system was a failure and meant more work.

ETA: It occurred to me some may not realise, but both magazines are run by the same company and share a building. It's not coincidence that they're using the same submissions system.

[Jamesaritchie]

At best, e-subs give those of us who are not middle class (or living in the US) a better chance at the submission game.

Not living in the U.S. I agree with, but the cost of snail mail within the U.S. is minimal. Dirt cheap, in fact. My average story, with cost of paper, ink, envelopes, and stamps all counted, costs about three bucks to get into submission.

Even with resubmitting rejected stories, and flooding the market as much as I can, my total shot story snail mail costs for an entire year seldom go above four hundred dollars, or about eight bucks per week. You don't have to be middle class to afford eight bucks per week. If you can afford a computer and an Internet connection, you can find eight bucks per week. Few writers are prolific enough to need even this small sum.

And the idea is to sell stories. One sale to anything like a decent market will cover most or all of a year's postage, paper, ink, and envelopes, and I firmly believe new writers stand a better chance of selling to good markets with snail mail submissions.

In her post about going electronic, the editor, Janet Hutchings, said something every editor knows. When personal computers first began to be generally affordable, EQMM received many submissions from people who said they’d started writing stories because they found it so much easier now that they had a computer (really, this is true!). It hardly needs to be said that those submissions were almost always a waste of our time, and we were glad when the computer became so much a part of ordinary life that non-writers found other, better uses for their machines.

The "ease" of using computers and word processors to write turned already big slush piles into much, much larger slush piles. E-submissions are doing the same thing to an even higher degree. Combine this with the real ease of rejecting stories with a click of the mouse, even if you've barely skimmed them as you sometimes have to do when slush piles get too big, and it isn't easier for new writers to break in at paying magazines, it's tougher.

Janet Hutchings is one of the best editors out there, and I think she'll do everything possible to stop this from happening, but sometimes even the best editors get overwhelmed, fall too far behind, and must take drastic measures. You simply can't allow slush to get too large, so you either start rejecting as fast as possible, or you shut down all submissions until you catch up. None of this is good for unpublished writers.

[eqb]

EQMM is using the same submission system as Asimov's.

The system was designed by Clarkesworld, and it's been adopted by a number of magazines (http://clarkesworld.livejournal.com/166981.html).

[Polenth]

The system was designed by Clarkesworld, and it's been adopted by a number of magazines (http://clarkesworld.livejournal.com/166981.html).

I don't have the link, but when Asimov's added it, people asked about the other Dell Magazines and it was said they might change depending how it went for Asimov's.

I'm not saying other totally unrelated magazines aren't using it. But in this case, it isn't coincidence and they wouldn't have added it if Asimov's was having a bad experience.

[eqb]

Oh, absolutely. I was just adding info about the system itself.

[Jamesaritchie]

The electronic system means you can reject at the click of a button and people can check they're in the queue without sending queries. My replies from Asimov's have been much faster via the electronic system (counting time they had the story only, not mailing times). So even if they do get more submissions, they can also process them faster.

EQMM is using the same submission system as Asimov's. I'm sure the editors of the two magazines talked about it before making a decision. They wouldn't have gone ahead with it if the Asimov's system was a failure and meant more work.

ETA: It occurred to me some may not realise, but both magazines are run by the same company and share a building. It's not coincidence that they're using the same submissions system.

I hope you're right, but it's the faster processing that's the problem for new writers. E-submissions are fast and efficient for submission and processing, but not for finding new, unpublished writers.

If e-submissions do not mean more work, it means the editor is doing something seriously bad for new writers.

Many haven't dealt with paper slush piles, and my experience is that they take longer not because they're paper, but because you spend more time with each story. Less slush and actual paper in your hands mean you read more of the story, give it a better chance, that you do with large e-slush.

It really has nothing to do with the system being a failure. It's most often a big success for editors and known writers, but not for brand new writers trying to break in.

It does depend on the individual magazine, of course. With some, the slush really doesn't grow much, or the nature of your magazine means relatively small slush piles regardless of how stories are submitted, and it depends on whether the editor has a first reader to weed out the obviously bad material.

[Gray Rose]

Not living in the U.S. I agree with, but the cost of snail mail within the U.S. is minimal. Dirt cheap, in fact. My average story, with cost of paper, ink, envelopes, and stamps all counted, costs about three bucks to get into submission.

Even with resubmitting rejected stories, and flooding the market as much as I can, my total shot story snail mail costs for an entire year seldom go above four hundred dollars, or about eight bucks per week. You don't have to be middle class to afford eight bucks per week. If you can afford a computer and an Internet connection, you can find eight bucks per week. Few writers are prolific enough to need even this small sum.

Let me venture a guess that you are not poor, have never been poor, have never been disabled, and/or have never been a caregiver to a disabled person.

This is the first and last time I will be saying anything on this subject on AW, but let me unpack this just a little for you, because usually I find your posts informative.

Eight dollars a week are eight packs of ramen noodles. About five packages of pasta. They might even stretch to eight packages of pasta if you know where to go. Four packages of pasta and four cans of tomato sauce, again if you know where to go. Three pairs of underwear at a discount store. Shall I go on? If you've never made these calculations, you've never been poor. Congratulations on your privilege!

When you are poor, you do not always own a printer. A computer, yes, but not a printer. Because you cannot afford paper and ink. Or maybe you owned a printer, but it broke down.

When you are poor,and caring for a disabled person, you often cannot go to the post office. You cannot leave your disabled person. Maybe you do not own a car. Or you own a car, but you cannot afford gas. Maybe you can afford gas, but it's a clunker, and in wintertime you are afraid to drive. Maybe you are disabled yourself. It is a hardship to get out of the house.

Let me repeat that - when you are disabled, it is often a hardship to get out of the house.

When you are poor, your chances of becoming disabled are greater, because you are less likely to have medical insurance.

Which is why, when you are poor, or disabled, or caring for a disabled person, e-subs are a godsend.

Editors who care about diversity increasingly recognize this. It is a good thing, IMHO.

[Adam Israel]

I hope you're right, but it's the faster processing that's the problem for new writers. E-submissions are fast and efficient for submission and processing, but not for finding new, unpublished writers.

This is not my experience, both as a slush reader and new-ish writer. Established, recognized writers may skip the slush and go straight to the editor. Newer writers need to pass the slush process before going to the editor. Nothing about that part of the process has changed, between paper and electronic submissions.

Submitting electronically makes it easier to tackle the slush pile. Distribution of manuscripts is no longer an issue, so there's no longer the limitation of slush readers being in the same physical location; more can be brought on to read and there are plenty of people willing to wrangle slush for the experience of it.

[oldcharliebrown]

" I'll wager that written submissions cut down on the amount of material submitted to a publication." You'd wager wrong, actually. I've worked on several genre magazines (still do!) and when we took paper submissions the quality was just as bad. (Sometimes even worse, as we got submissions done in crayon or material sent from prison inmates.) So I call this one a myth. And in my experience the number of submissions do not go up, on the average, either. And as pointed out the response times at ASIMOV's have actually been faster, not slower. :p

I'd actually say that Janet is wrong in her editorial. Times have changed. Yes, you should see an immediate increase, but then it balances out down the road, especially as authors transition from snailmail to online. It's already been seen to work at many other magazines, already. And obviously if it was a problem at ASIMOV's, it wouldn't have been adopted elsewhere.

An online submission system actually makes it easier, not harder, for newer authors to get published. (As established authors generally skip the slush anyway) It depends on the editor, and the slush team, more than anything else, really, not the slush itself. It's how you use it, not anything else that matters. :)

[Susan Lanigan]

I subbed to them just now. Subbing went fine but when I clicked the link on the "track progress" email, got a 404...

[Jamesaritchie]

" I'll wager that written submissions cut down on the amount of material submitted to a publication." You'd wager wrong, actually. I've worked on several genre magazines (still do!) and when we took paper submissions the quality was just as bad. (Sometimes even worse, as we got submissions done in crayon or material sent from prison inmates.) So I call this one a myth. And in my experience the number of submissions do not go up, on the average, either. And as pointed out the response times at ASIMOV's have actually been faster, not slower. :p

I'd actually say that Janet is wrong in her editorial. Times have changed. Yes, you should see an immediate increase, but then it balances out down the road, especially as authors transition from snail mail to online. It's already been seen to work at many other magazines, already. And obviously if it was a problem at ASIMOV's, it wouldn't have been adopted elsewhere.

An online submission system actually makes it easier, not harder, for newer authors to get published. (As established authors generally skip the slush anyway) It depends on the editor, and the slush team, more than anything else, really, not the slush itself. It's how you use it, not anything else that matters. :)

No, electronic does not make it easier for new writers to get published. That doesn't even make sense. Paper may be as bad, but it sure as heck isn't as massive. And the simple fact remains that electronic does make for more submissions. Right here on AW we have all sorts of writers who won't even submit to magazines that want snail mail.

No one said it''s a problem for editors, or for established writers. To them, it's a Godsend. For new writers, it simply is not as good.

[Izz]

James, oldcharliebrown knows what he's talking about. His editing experience is current and ongoing.

And Rose, i agree with you completely about electronic subs giving people outside of middle-class America an opportunity to chase their dreams. Diversity in genre fiction (and all fiction, but genre is my thang) is nothing but good.

[stormie]

When I first started subbing over eleven years ago, it was mostly by snail mail. I spent so much money on envelopes (mailer and business size), postage (for SASE too), ink, paper.... And many times, if the printer jammed or the print looked faint, I had to clean the print heads (using up more ink), and reprint the pages.

I swear in that first year alone I must have spent at least $50 on all of the above, since I was subbing short stories and essays.

And I prefer the electronic submissions over email too. This way you know they received it and can track the progress.

[MeretSeger]

I subbed to them just now. Subbing went fine but when I clicked the link on the "track progress" email, got a 404...

Has that cleared up for you? I subbed about the same time and I still get that on the link. When I actually log on to their system, it recognizes the number and says received, though...

Hopefully, it's just a link glitch.

[Shadow_Ferret]

At best, e-subs give those of us who are not middle class (or living in the US) a better chance at the submission game.

Not sure what this means. When I was a teenager, the ONLY way to sub was through the mail. I'd hardly call a teenager middle class.

Even today, postage is NOT that much.

[Izz]

Not sure what this means. When I was a teenager, the ONLY way to sub was through the mail. I'd hardly call a teenager middle class.

Even today, postage is NOT that much.Read Rose's next post, SF. It explains her standpoint well.

[Gray Rose]

Not sure what this means. When I was a teenager, the ONLY way to sub was through the mail. I'd hardly call a teenager middle class.

Even today, postage is NOT that much.

How did you pay postage? I bet it was pocket money.

Because you know, I did not get any pocket money growing up. I did not get lunch money either. I did not get money for clothes. I did not get money for textbooks. You know why? Because I was an immigrant. My family was struggling and poor. Sending snail mail anywhere was out of the question.

How are you not a middle-class kid if your middle-class parents are paying your postage?

[Polenth]

Classes do have a range. My family has always been working class, but we went from poor working class to comfortable with some luxuries working class. That said, my childhood pocket money would have paid for less than one submission to the US a month (with no spare money for anything else). You can't really say that would be an improvement over being able to submit electronically (which wasn't possible when I was younger, but if I'd grown up today, I could use the library or school systems to send submissions).

I'm both better and worse off now. My family has more money, so I get food and taken places. But I don't get pocket money as an adult and my writing earnings are well below the poverty line. I'd use up all the money I earnt writing if I posted submissions.

[Shadow_Ferret]

How are you not a middle-class kid if your middle-class parents are paying your postage?

Assuming I had middle class parents.

Or pockets.

I got my money by collecting bottles and returning them to the store.

[RIFF]

Great! I sure can't afford to mail off manuscripts, let alone print them up, to send off to an unknown fate.
I can't believe people who aren't poor can ever be truly great writers. )

[stormie]

Turn-around time now for a rejection from EQMM with the electronic submission form is (for me) three weeks. Much faster than with snail mail. And, of course, no money spent on postage, paper, ink, or envelopes.

[jaksen]

Turn-around time now for a rejection from EQMM with the electronic submission form is (for me) three weeks. Much faster than with snail mail. And, of course, no money spent on postage, paper, ink, or envelopes.

Wow, three weeks is amazing for a magazine of that caliber.

I have never submitted electronically (to EQMM). Now I think I have to.

[stormie]

Wow, three weeks is amazing for a magazine of that caliber.

I have never submitted electronically (to EQMM). Now I think I have to.
Usually with them by snail mail it'd be two months or more.

[Oat Farmer]

The question is not whether electronic submissions are advantageous to beginning writers. Paper mail wastes both natural and human resources. Better and cheaper prevails in the end. A writer should ask 'How can I take advantage of electronic submissions?' not waste energy on whether or not electronic submission is good. It will be as good for you as you make it, but you will not avoid it.

[Quantum1019]

I submitted a story to them about 3 weeks ago, just got an email telling me they were unable to open my file for some reason, but inviting me to resubmit immediately and include a reminder that it was a resubmission so they would bump it up in the queue. Hopefully it works this time.

My previous submission to EQM, by snail mail just before they began the electronic subs, got me a rejection in less than two weeks.

[jaksen]

Usually with them by snail mail it'd be two months or more.

With EQMM and AHMM it takes me an average of three months (for rejection or acceptance).

But recently I heard about a submission from last summer. It was accepted last week.

Will electronic submissions speed things up? If they're still reading summer submissions...

[stormie]

Will electronic submissions speed things up? If they're still reading summer submissions...
I noted this on page one: (But that's for a rejection)

Turn-around time now for a rejection from EQMM with the electronic submission form is (for me) three weeks.

[Quantum1019]

Has anyone else been having issues with EQMM's electronic submissions? I submitted a story a month ago, got a reply two weeks later telling me they were unable to open the file, and inviting me to resubmit. I did and just now received another "unable to view file, please resubmit" message. I've submitted to other magazines that use similar forms and had no problems. Any suggestions?

[stormie]

I haven't been over there in a few weeks nor submitted recently. There's a forum at EQMM/AHMM you could do a search on and see if anyone else is having problems. If you can't find an answer, maybe contact Janet H. the editor. Check your file's extensions. Make sure it's what they want (.doc or whatever).

[Polenth]

Has anyone else been having issues with EQMM's electronic submissions? I submitted a story a month ago, got a reply two weeks later telling me they were unable to open the file, and inviting me to resubmit. I did and just now received another "unable to view file, please resubmit" message. I've submitted to other magazines that use similar forms and had no problems. Any suggestions?

Are you sending them a doc file? I noticed they don't take rft, which many places do... so you can have an rtf which was fine for everyone else, but not for EQMM.

[Quantum1019]

Yes, it was a doc file. I followed the instructions to the letter both times. I haven't had a problem with submission forms anywhere else either, just with EQMM.

I'm considering trying it one more time and then if it doesn't work I'll ask for permission to submit either via email or snail mail.

[Susan Lanigan]

Follow-up: it must have reached them because they have accepted me :)

[shelleyo]

Follow-up: it must have reached them because they have accepted me :)

Hey, congratulations!

Shelley

[stormie]

Follow-up: it must have reached them because they have accepted me :)
Yes! Congrats :)

[Izz]

Congrats, Susan!

[Susan Lanigan]

Thank you :) the story is not straightforward crime fiction, tho I did realise it could well qualify and remodelled it slightly a few years ago. I've never been published in that genre before so it is quite exciting.

[Kate Thornton]

Holy cow, great news! Congrats!!!!!

..