• Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.

YouWriteOn.com / New Generation Publishing / Legend Press

RandomNotes

Registered
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
29
Reaction score
1
When Ted began mentioning the "as soon after Christmas" thing (some time in the 3rd week of December) I went back through all my YWO emails and the contract. The Christmas date was mentioned in all the emails, the "Soon after" clause is only mentioned in the contract. This suggests that even before the closing date of 31st October, Ted had started to get a grasp of how much work was going to be involved.

From my side, I don't know Ted, but I don't think he is a con-man. He is, at best, inept. He took on a project that was impossibly large, then made it harder for himself by changing the rules - he originally said any "Non-Standard" PDF or cover designs would be rejected.

He didn't reject them. He worked hard to correct them. Some authors now wouldn't see their books in print if hadn't have put that effort in. So, score 1 for trying, minus several hundred for allowing that problem to delay everyone else. What he should have done was allowed the correct PDF and cover designs through, then come back to the rest.

I would imagine, over Christmas, he is working hard now on the rest of the books. He comes across as that sort of bloke. Sadly, devotion, honesty and even hard work are nothing without a sense of communication, which Ted sadly lacks. None of his targets were hit, none of his promises kept, and when deadlines came and went, we got very little feedback and communication on what was going on.

Ted, through devoting himself to correcting PDF and cover designs instead of making endless posts on the forum, probably thought this was the way to go, perhaps he is right. From my point of view I think he should have fudged it somewhere between the middle.

But that's the past. On to the future. I notice now that Ted is offering a book publishing service that starts at £399 and wanders all the way up to 1500 quid!
 
Last edited:

Finchlark

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
197
Reaction score
28
Location
Norfolk, England
Website
www.finchlark.webs.com
Random, Ted managed to post replies to little questions like "can I change my username from capitals to lower case" etc and spend time on thanking people for thanking him. BUT he never - not once - answered emails or posts from those anxiously awaiting news. Even now there are those who have still been ignored. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, he cherrypicked.
 

Finchlark

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
197
Reaction score
28
Location
Norfolk, England
Website
www.finchlark.webs.com
Thanks I was in time for a press meeting with photos etc. which I thought I was going to miss waiting for YWO! To answer your query, the books costs £2.20 each from Lulu. Of course we never did hear what the cost would be from YWO, but one author posted their email said £5 each plus £3.30 p & p.


By the way, on the issue of Lulu postage from USA, my books came from UK and arrived next day.
 

Dollywagon

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
141
Not if I can help it!

I'm testing out a theory (with the aim of getting the Arts Council to withdraw support.)


That's very good of you - and then where would we all go for reviews - here, I suppose?

Only, 'here,' Gothic, means there is a time delay for UK writers and you sometimes have to wait a goodly while for a response. Here, Fibreglass is spelled Fiberglass. Here, 'dribbling' is something you do in basketball, it isn't drooling, and if you have something reviewed, this and many other faults will be found out.
No, not a big deal, really it's not - but I for one prefer to sometimes talk to people in my own time zone and who can read my work in the style it was written in.

Re; the funding. Any organisation can apply to as many bodies offering funding as they like. Most get numerous applications in every year - most go for match funding as well. It's not exactly criminal to apply if you meet criteria and win funding, and from what I can gather the AC funding was for the professional reviews - it's really good of you to try and get that stopped.
Thanks.
 

qwerty

exiled Brit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
222
Location
Burgundy
Ref post #451. Usually, when a post is quoted, it contains only words made by the poster. So I was a bit disconcerted to see words inserted that I hadn't used.

But to get to the point:

If you meant to imply the review system is bad, then say so,

I didn't suggest the review system is bad. Although a bunch of under-age American school kids rampaging destructively through the system wasn't appreciated.

Giving fellow members reviews on their work in return for your reviews on others' work is okay. Generally speaking, reviewers tend to be fair, and you learn to take the occasional sabotage review in your stride.

However, what is not okay is the practice to ignore the ratings given by fellow members. Highly rated work being down-graded below the reviewing members wishes is not only unfair to them, but is not in keeping with YWO's pledge to discover and help writing talent. Which I believe is what Arts Council funding was based on.

Whilst this particular topic would seem to digress from the publishing issue currently in focus, I believe it is all part and parcel of how public money is being spent. It appears that the recipient of a considerable sum of Arts Council funding is now digressing from the original aim in favour of developing a personal business under the auspices of the supposed respectability of The Arts Council of England.
 
Last edited:

eqb

I write novels
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
4,680
Reaction score
2,055
Location
In the resistance
Website
www.claireodell.com
Only, 'here,' Gothic, means there is a time delay for UK writers and you sometimes have to wait a goodly while for a response. Here, Fibreglass is spelled Fiberglass...

Correction: AW members are from all over the world, from the UK to Sri Lanka to Australia to Canada to a number of other places. So there is no one time zone for AW, and there are many members who know UK spelling.
 

petec

Lurking
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
709
Reaction score
432
Re; the funding. Any organisation can apply to as many bodies offering funding as they like. Most get numerous applications in every year - most go for match funding as well. It's not exactly criminal to apply if you meet criteria and win funding, and from what I can gather the AC funding was for the professional reviews - it's really good of you to try and get that stopped.
Thanks.

To requote from Ted's Christmas message when he closed the YWO message board on Christmas Eve:

"There comes a point when a website grows to become community driven more than web-site led and YouWriteOn has in many ways reached this point from a simple starting point of review exchange. This was never a brilliant idea in itself"

Does this suggest to anyone else that the purpose of the original funding is on its way out?
 
Last edited:

qwerty

exiled Brit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
222
Location
Burgundy
Correction: AW members are from all over the world, from the UK to Sri Lanka to Australia to Canada to a number of other places. So there is no one time zone for AW, and there are many members who know UK spelling.

And the same applies to YWO members.
 

Dollywagon

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
141
Ah, okay. Then I'm entirely missing Dollywagon's point about spelling and timezones.

*goes away puzzled*

I don't think it's that puzzling - and if anything else I've said anybody would like to comment about, do feel free.

If you write something and the wording is misunderstood by somebody because, to them, it is out of context - then they get jolted out of the story, or have to ask questions, whatever ... the story for the reader is distrupted. It's also disruptive for the writer because they then start having to explain things.
It is easier, isn't it, for somebody to read the story from your own perspective so they still have the flow?

Or are you still puzzled?

And yes, Qwerty, there are some overseas members on YWO, but from my persective having access to a UK site in UK time works better - I don't live in Australia or Canada - maybe those countries even have a few sites of their own dotted about?

I was actually replying to one of your posts earlier on but lost my connection, so here goes:-
I just got confused about your statement regarding the review system. I thought you had to be a registered user on YWO to post stories and review them, but earlier you said you weren't a registered user so I must have got it wrong.

With regard to AC funding - I don't know how you know money is being digressed from supporting the review section of the site to the publishing section?
I know I originally thought the AC were funding it, I was probably actually one of the first people to bring the subject up on the boards - but Ted came on straight away, and in his favour, said that the AC funding had nothing to do with the publication sector.

Now if you are telling me that the funding is being re-directed, I'd like to know, how you know?
 

Dollywagon

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
141
And the same applies to YWO members.


... and the site works on UK time, and Ted, (did) come on in UK time and the majority of the users are from the UK.

And on AW the majority of members come on after 1pm our time ... or are you going to tell me the boards were heaving with green lights when I was posting this morning?
 

victoriastrauss

Writer Beware Goddess
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
6,704
Reaction score
1,314
Location
Far from the madding crowd
Website
www.victoriastrauss.com
... and the site works on UK time, and Ted, (did) come on in UK time and the majority of the users are from the UK.

And on AW the majority of members come on after 1pm our time ... or are you going to tell me the boards were heaving with green lights when I was posting this morning?

I confess I'm also puzzled as to why this is (or seems to be--forgive me if I'm misinterpreting) a concern for you--though I do take your point about different spellings and word usages. However, as Beth pointed out, AW members are from all over the world, with very many from the UK, so I think most of us are used to seeing UK usage and spelling here. (Speaking just for myself, basketball wouldn't be my first thought on seeing the word "dribbling," given that I'm completely uninterested in team sports.)

With regard to AC funding - I don't know how you know money is being digressed from supporting the review section of the site to the publishing section?
I don't think anyone claimed to know this, but rather to suspect it based on recent changes and announcements at YWO.

However, I would discourage this kind of public speculation. We don't have any evidence (as far as I'm aware) that money is being diverted, or that the review/critique system is being phased out. Dollywagon's question quoted above shows how easy it is to read speculation as an assertion of fact. This is how rumors get started, and given how damaging rumor can be, I think we need to be very, very careful about such things.

- Victoria
 

Dollywagon

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
141
Sorry if you still don't get my drift, so maybe it's better if I say; personally, I find it more productive for me to get reviews from a UK site where I've never had any confusion.

Other UK users may not find this.

... and I think Victoria is quite right to state that until facts are known it's not good to speculate.

Personally I didn't specifically read into Ted's statement that AC funding would be diverted, having a limited knowledge of funding (unless he applied for new monies under different criteria) I don't see how it could be done, the criteria under which you apply is generally pretty strict and Ted has a profile that anybody, anywhere, can see at a glance.

But that aside, I personally was quite offended when Gothicangel came on and said something akin to 'I'm going to try and get the AC money stopped.' Not something you expect from a fellow countryman regarding a site that has been a very valuable and positive influence for a lot of people.
Either way, if the review section now goes because Ted decides to pull it and focus on his new business, or the AC pulls the funding, I'll be gutted for all the members - me included.

Right, I do hope you lot don't consider me to be 'flouncing' but I did have a new ruling after the last YWO 'bash,' and promised myself not to join in on any forums 'cos they were eating valuable time. Must, after today, stick to that promise and get some dosh earned!
 

qwerty

exiled Brit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
222
Location
Burgundy
I don't know how you know money is being digressed from supporting the review section of the site to the publishing section?

Now if you are telling me that the funding is being re-directed, I'd like to know, how you know?

Actually, what I said was: "It appears that the recipient of a considerable sum of Arts Council funding is now digressing from the original aim" I did not suggest that "money is being digressed" (I don't actually understand the concept of money being digressed. I was referring to a person digressing from his stated aim). Neither did I suggest that "funding is being re-directed".

Edward Smith received AC funding in order to set up an on-line writing scheme to be of benefit to aspiring writers. I, and no one here, has suggested he is using that money to venture into vanity publishing. What he has used it for is to set up a platform/vehicle to encourage wannabe writers to go for vanity publishing.
 

BenPanced

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
17,859
Reaction score
4,625
Location
dunking doughnuts at Dunkin' Donuts
But that aside, I personally was quite offended when Gothicangel came on and said something akin to 'I'm going to try and get the AC money stopped.' Not something you expect from a fellow countryman regarding a site that has been a very valuable and positive influence for a lot of people.
But if the funds are being misused, would you rather Gothicangel and other people in the UK have remained silent?
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
Snipping....

With regard to Ted removing threads: Hmm, I did mention to Old Hack (on YWO) that I was surprised she hadn’t had some removed before, I think this was a couple of days previous to her saying some had gone (and according to the threads posting here, Ted confirmed this) I mentioned it because I honestly don’t think other sites would have tolerated such statements as, “I don’t like to see writers getting ripped off…” Ouch!


Dolly, if I remember rightly (and I can't go back and check right now because the YWO board's down), I posted that comment in response to questions about why I ran my blog, not with regard to YWO. However, I'm still not convinced that the YWO publishing scheme is the best option for any of the writers involved with it: so many seem to be unaware of the full implications of the scheme and in that context it does seem to me that they're being ripped off.

The post of mine that was removed and which (as Priceless quoted) Ted said contained misleading information was not misleading: far from it.

If I remember rightly, people had asked how to get books into Waterstones; I'd posted a link to Gardners' website which contained the appropriate information, and then someone else responded to say how easy that seemed. I pointed out that Ted had already said he had no intention of dealing with Gardners (to set discounts and SOR), and that the authors couldn't do that themselves as it was up to the publishers to price up their books; and I pointed out that even if the books WERE listed with good discount and SOR, that didn't guarantee that the books would get into the shops as there still was no sales force in place to do that; the authors would have to buy their books themselves, but without any authors' discount in place, and no royalties to be earned on those books, then they would lose money on every copy they sold. And THAT's what Ted deleted, I'm 99% sure. Nothing misleading: just some uncomfortable truth.

I also saw on this board (I’m talking a couple of weeks ago now) Victoria saying the book covers were ‘ugly,’ and a couple of folk trawling the books that were already published for spelling mistakes and grammatical errors – my impression at the time was that the AW folk weren’t actually being very supportive of fellow writers … ie; it read as if commentators were being critical of the quality of the work submitted – now, it seems, that YWO are at fault.

Dolly, have you seen the book covers that Victoria was talking about? They are ugly, I'm afraid, and won't sell well if they ever get onto bookshop shelves. It's harsh, but it's true. And that ugly cover is the one that most people have ended up with.

I had a look at some of the books as they appeared in Barnes and Noble and saw numerous mistakes which had been added when the books were downloaded onto the B&N site: one book had one author name on the cover and another on the B&N details, several had two different titles, and so on. This is very important: pointing out those errors isn't nitpicking because it means that people aren't going to be able to find those books if they search the B&N site for them--and that makes it impossible for them to sell.

Overall, I felt that a little humility and restraint wouldn’t have gone amiss. I would also have liked to see more AW posters over there giving advice, rather than directing people to different sites. If you are that concerned people are being led astray then the mountain should go to Mohammed.

I did go over there, and I posted all sorts of advice. I'm not prepared to lie on public forums and so, when I was asked straight questions, I answered them; and when I saw misinformation being posted, I did my best to correct that misinformation. I didn't expect people to be grateful, but common courtesy would not have been out of place.

Also I was a bit sick to see writers on the site who had got their books published … ‘gloating,’ … yes, that is the word, over others that hadn’t. The whole thing just turned horrible.

I thought that was horrible too.

So yes, I will support YWO, in respect of its review system, because it is good and I won’t abandon it simply because of this mess. It’s a UK site, the reviews are supported by the Arts Council and it’s UK publishers that give their time in reviewing winning stories – thanks to them all – and, although I find AW extremely helpful and supportive in many aspects, for me, the YWO review system is one I would prefer to stick with.

I think that the review side is YWO's jewel, really: it's a fabulous idea, and has been of use to many writers. It's a shame that it's going to be tarnished by all this, really.

… and Old Hack, where on earth do you live in Sheffeld (not a spelling mistake) that you can put up a wind turbine and it get windy enough to get your windows blown in? I used to live there up on a hill and all we got was snow …

We're up on the moors to the west of the town. I can't see a single other house or road, just moorland, trees and sky; and we've got one of the highest windspeeds in the country. It's a glorious place AND I can be in John Lewis in 25 minutes--brilliant.
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
By the way, on the issue of Lulu postage from USA, my books came from UK and arrived next day.

I think that although Lulu is based in America, it subcontracts some of that work to a UK-based POD printer (near Southampton, I think). So even though the books are ordered from the USA site, if they're destined for the UK they're printed here.

I could be wrong... I'll see what I can find out. It might be made clear on Lulu's site.
 

Shimshon

Registered
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
14
Reaction score
1
Location
Where it's hot and sunny.
Hi everyone, I’m new on the site. There’s a great deal to discover and I’m only just feeling my way around at the moment. It looks fascinating though. I picked up on this thread because I’ve been a member of YWO for seven months. I’ve benefited greatly from the review system, but when I saw the initial offer to publish 5000 I didn’t feel tempted to take the plunge; just call it my cynical nature & the fact I’ve nearly been scammed before. I think The 300 would have been a more appropriate name under which to pitch this scheme; if only. Nevertheless, my thoughts go out to all those folk who may have potential door jams and jumble sale fodder as a reward for their first venture into publishing. The upside is that it didn’t cost an arm and a leg. The downside, it isn’t going to help anyone get closer to receiving the thumbs up from an agent or publisher. I’ve been pitching my work for over six years now and have only just been asked for a full MS with a view to further developments. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you folk that it’s a hard slog, requires determination, a prize fighter’s jaw & the desire to constantly improve. No pain, no gain - excuse the cliché. Putting all this aside however, why not let time reveal if Ted’s scheme was a well intentioned debacle or a gift wrapped con. It doesn’t do to speculate too much. If the former, then lesson learnt & move on. If it’s the latter, shout about it everywhere to warn others and move on. Either way, it’s done and dusted and I see little point trying to predict where it’s all going to end; the answer to this question won’t be revealed for many, many months to come. Whatever happens, YWO will never be the same again. It’s lost its impartiality and, imho, its credibility, sad, very sad. Oh well, onward & upward. I’m looking forward to exploring this comprehensive site; I can see there’s much here to help the aspiring writer.


I hope you all enjoyed a merry Christmas and wishing you a happy new year.

His barrister lived in reverse.
 

Roger J Carlson

Moderator In Name Only
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
12,799
Reaction score
2,499
Location
West Michigan
Whatever happens, YWO will never be the same again. It’s lost its impartiality and, imho, its credibility, sad, very sad.
This is perhaps the saddest thing of all. The history of publishing is littered with schemes like this, created with the best of intentions. Most of the time, they end up the same in some sort of self/subsidy publishing model because they can't make money any other way. Whether done with good intentions or ill, the result for the writer is unfortunately the same.
 

James D. Macdonald

Your Genial Uncle
Absolute Sage
VPX
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
25,582
Reaction score
3,785
Location
New Hampshire
Website
madhousemanor.wordpress.com
Putting all this aside however, why not let time reveal if Ted’s scheme was a well intentioned debacle or a gift wrapped con.


From the point of view of an author who wants her works widely read by the general public...it doesn't matter.

Best to stick with publishers who have the proven ability to get their books widely distributed (and no, being listed in on-line catalogs doesn't count).
 

qwerty

exiled Brit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
1,076
Reaction score
222
Location
Burgundy
Welcome, Shimshon. I'm sure I won't be the only one to appreciate your calm, rational post.

Yes, a lot of people enjoy what YWO began as: a community for writers to exchange reviews on each others' work. The scheme has faults - like the unreliable rating system - but, a lot of writers have gained enjoyment from the scheme and are feeling sad that the un-wise offer to publish 5,000 books by Christmas has left a bad taste.

My personal opinion - and it is only my opinion - is that it was unlikely that, within the membership, there were 5,000 completed books. If they exist, there is a fair chance that some of them fell short of publishable standard.

Either way, it’s done and dusted and I see little point trying to predict where it’s all going to end; the answer to this question won’t be revealed for many, many months to come.

I believe that the answer to whether or not it was a good scheme to entice writers toward the path of vanity publishing with no quality control in place has already been revealed. As has the fact that the offer was made by someone who was well out of his depth. Sadly, members of the YWO community trusted their leader, and many have been disappointed.

Meanwhile, I sincerely wish you loadsa luck with the requested full MS. Just getting that far is something to be proud of.
 

Shimshon

Registered
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
14
Reaction score
1
Location
Where it's hot and sunny.
Many thanks for the good wishes querty. Can you please elaborate on the following?
Quote: However, what is not okay is the practice to ignore the ratings given by fellow members. Highly rated work being down-graded below the reviewing members wishes is not only unfair to them, but is not in keeping with YWO's pledge to discover and help writing talent. Which I believe is what Arts Council funding was based on.

I’m just interested to know how this happened. All the best, Shim.
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
Shimshon, welcome to AW.

Before the YWO message board disappeared last week, there were several posts on it in which members asked why their work didn't seem to be ranked as they thought it should.

If I remember rightly, several posters there noticed that work with lower scores than theirs was appearing above theirs in the ranking.

Various explanations were given about how the rankings worked: the scoring system relies on ignoring deviations from the norm (standard deviations). Some members who challenged this were, if I remember rightly, banned from the message boards--although I wasn't party to that particular skirmish, so I might well be wrong there!

You might like to read Finchlark's comment about this on page 15 of this thread. There are others, but that's the first one I've found here.