I crit at Write On Con as if I'm here on AW but I always say "This is just my opinion so take what you will and good luck revising." It definitely is on the gentler side but I prefer honesty over Thisisamazing!!! Just my thoughts
Yeah, in my experience, conference go'ers tend to range from seasoned veteran writers to brand newbies who are just learning the ropes, so I tend to be a little cautious with my critiques at cons.
Yes. The videos are up all week i believe.
I am the same way. I have a bad habit of reading only what draws me in--which means if it doesn't draw me in, I stop reading it and don't say anything about it. Some stories just aren't my cup of tea and with others I'm not sure what turns me off. So I go for the stuff I like and try to give pointers where I see them, even if it is just personal preferences.My crits probably seem too gushy, but it's because I gravitate toward the stories I like, or the stories I feel have the most potential, and to which I feel the writing is already quite good. So it's not that I don't want to rip your work apart and stomp on it, it's that I can't spot the weak parts the way more experienced critters are able to.
As someone who is definitely new to the whole publishing end of writing, I appreciate that. I think you can tell the difference between people who've been at this for a while and people who are just starting out by the knowledge too. I had to look up what active and passive voice was at one point, but that's probably a weak example. I'm curious as to the differences in posting style though. What sets the newbies apart from the vets?I think you can usually tell who's been around the block and who's really new at writing professionally based on their posting style and/or the current quality of their writing. But yeah, I tend to lean more toward gentle suggestion.
I'm curious as to the differences in posting style though. What sets the newbies apart from the vets?
The Ninjas have started. (Saw one on a thread I'd commented on.)