Algonkian Writer Conferences / WebDelSol

harrijsh said:

HapiSofi...I did; was getting ready to pay and send in the work, but it seems that many have the opinion on here that it would be a waste of money.

Click to expand...

If you're planning to be a writer, hiring an editor to fix your book is a bad idea, and a worse one if you write fiction. If you want to hire one to do a commercial assessment, it's an option. As ICE says, pick an appropriate editor. I doubt it'll do you anywhere near as much good as a critique group, but that's up to you.

Actually, it's still on you from my viewpoint because I cannot verify the claim. Thanks, Stacia, again could you provide me link to the "secret" claim on Algonkian?

Click to expand...

I'm not Stacia, but I know what she's referrring to. Algonkian makes this claim on several websites, including this one:

This unique writer conference was developed by the editors and authors at Algonkian Writer Conferences to provide you, the aspiring author, with not only network connections, but comprehensive, hands-on experience utilizing the craft skills, insider advice, and hard-to-swallow facts you must possess before you can even hope to get a first novel successfully published in this tougher-than-ever market. This is experience and info you will not receive at any other conference...

Click to expand...

In essence, they claim to have the key to getting published and that you won't find this information in any other conference or workshop. "Secret" is a fair shortcut term, imo.

No, Giant Baby. I meant to say something like we "have here" a "good" track record and so forth so forth, reference to the claim above. I was typing and thinking quickly, sputtering. No need to get paranoid.

This has gone far enough and has become very time wasting and calorie consuming.

Let me go check my blood pressure, thanks! I'm sure every sentence will be taken apart and the parts probed for weaknesses.

And I don't need freshman comp!!!!!!

In essence, they claim to have the key to getting published and that you won't find this information in any other conference or workshop. "Secret" is a fair shortcut term, imo.

Click to expand...

I understand now. I see the bit about you cannot get their information at any other conference, okay. That does sound exaggerated, but it's not logical to jump to "secret" because that implies you would not be able to get the information anywhere in the universe except there, and of course that isn't true.

But I get the point, yes. I do see their syllabus and ms analysis provides input and info to the writer I have not seen at other writer events but I'm sure there is overlap with other conferences in some respects.

Point made.

Note that they don't only claim to be unique, but they claim to have "insider information." The combination of the two implies "secret." (At least to me. And I'm very logical. *g*)

Rebecca Gallison said:

No, Giant Baby. I meant to say something like we "have here" a "good" track record and so forth so forth, reference to the claim above. I was typing and thinking quickly, sputtering. No need to get paranoid.

This has gone far enough and has become very time wasting and calorie consuming.

Let me go check my blood pressure, thanks! I'm sure every sentence will be taken apart and the parts probed for weaknesses.

And I don't need freshman comp!!!!!!

Click to expand...

???

Not feeling paranoid in the slightest. Just asking for clarification as I was confused about your use of the pronoun. If you had some affiliation with the conference that you'd felt bashful about disclosing earlier, it would put your posts here into perspective. Meh. Good luck.

Rebecca Gallison said:

And I don't need freshman comp!!!!!!

Click to expand...

Yeah, you do.

You struggle with subject-verb agreement, you think the comma splice is a religious rite, you indulge in frequent overuse of prepositional phrases, you misuse words, and you have absolutely no control.

Moreover, you have entitlement issues; we are not here to do your research. Do it yourself.

Finally, it's your money, and your life; I don't care what you do with either.

You guys act worse than my high schoolers.

Seriously? I've had enough.

Read this whole thread. Read all of the other threads linked to in it (and follow all of the links, since the bit eqb quoted above has been quoted and linked to more than once in this thread already. A few of the sockpuppet blogs have been linked in those references as well, but here's one more for you; what she doesn't tell you in her enthusiastic "Hey, I heard this conference is great! I'm gonna try it, whee!" rambling is that she's a WebdelSol staffer). Make your own decision.

I don't give a tinker's damn if you want to give Algonkian every penny you earn, frankly. Be my guest. I do give a damn about wasting more of my time analyzing whether or not the numbers Clarion provides are less reliable than the numbers Algonkian provides (I notice you didn't have an issue with me taking their numbers at face value) or whether or not people everyone agrees aren't trying to scam anyone are in fact scamming people because somebody made a statement about scams--intended simply to let people know the mere presence of an industry professional doesn't confer some sort of approval--in the same paragraph as another statement, or whatever else.


I highly suggest you read the Newbie's Guide, Rebecca, and visit some of the other forums and discussions here which will perhaps not be as confusing for you.

I hope to see you elsewhere on the forum. Perhaps since you say you're hoping to write fantasy, you might like to visit that forum?

harrijsh said:

You guys act worse than my high schoolers.

Click to expand...

We love you too darlin'.

Y'all have a nice day.

(N.B. I'm sure that what you meant to say was "You guys behave worse than my high schoolers," because, after all, we're not the ones engaging in amateur theatricals and performance art.)

Rebecca Gallison said:

I'm very confused.

Click to expand...

As an outsider to this, it's clear you're confused. You're seeing people as saying things they didn't say. You're taking keywords from posts, but not the context of the words or how they fit together. Due to the way you interpreted things, you were immediately on the defensive because you were confused. The questions were worded aggressively, with the implication that people were lying and they had to prove to you that they were not. This meant people were upset. As some of these things were things people didn't say (meaning their answers were basically "I didn't say that"), they were even more upset.

But you didn't understand why they were upset, so you were upset with them for being upset.

You best bet is to take some time out. Look at the social sub-forums on this site (this isn't a social sub-forum). Some of your questions would actually be better elsewhere anyway. For example, if you want to know about Clarion, there's at least one person involved with the planning side in the Science Fiction and Fantasy sub-forum (and a lot of people who've attended). If you want help with verbal pitches, there's a public speaking forum.

Rebecca Gallison:
This is becoming a ridiculous argument, but it's started so I'll continue.

Click to expand...

This is always a good reason for continuing a ridiculous argument.

Rebecca Gallison:
I am not stupid, I don't need freshman comp, and I don't like being made to look foolish.

Click to expand...

Continuing what you admit to be a ridiculous argument and looking foolish kind of go hand in hand.

Rebecca Gallison:
I am not here to defend Algonkian, just to arrive at a simple truth or two which becomes more and more elusive and forces more and more argument as this develops.

Click to expand...

What is the "simple truth or two" that you seek?

Having been following this thread for the last couple of weeks, I think that it's been pretty comprehensively established that going to a conference is fun and can be informative but is in no way a secret 'in' to getting published. We've also established that some people who have been published have been to particular conferences (whether Clarion, Algonkian, Viable Paradise or something else).

What we haven't established is whether the pitch sessions promoted by Algonkian have led to a publishing deal. There has been some discussion as to the value of pitches as a way to securing a publishing deal, with the predominant opinion expressed being that they are unlikely to help.

So what else do you want to explore here?

And by the way, like the "secret" information, I've gone from this board to examine statements made, and I cannot anything that says they alone can tell students what they need to know to get published. Can you please publish the link and show me?

Click to expand...

Link is here:

http://writeandpitchconference.com/

The key phrase is this:

This unique writer conference was developed by the editors and authors at Algonkian Writer Conferences to provide you, the aspiring author, with not only network connections, but comprehensive, hands-on experience utilizing the craft skills, insider advice, and hard-to-swallow facts you must possess before you can even hope to get a first novel successfully published in this tougher-than-ever market.

Click to expand...

The point made here over and over again is that what Algonkian is doing is not unique. Plenty of other conferences do the same thing.

Rebecca Gallison:
There's just some things going on here with certain personalities that I feel very uncomfortable about, and that I want to clear up before I become part of the club. Maybe I'm getting hazed right now? Is Medievalist the appointed hazer? Do other writers posting newbie on here get told to take freshman comp? I've never been insulted like this in any workshop I've ever attended.

Click to expand...

No, you're not being hazed. You are posting in one of the most brutal forums on AW. My suggestion would be that you check out the other Forums if you're serious about writing because you'll find it easier going.

Rebecca Gallison:
So SFWA does note positive reasons to hire the right kind of editor once you've taken things as far as you can take them. Like many others, it appears they recognize the value in an editor when the board members here insist that isn't necessary.

Click to expand...

You're taking those quotes out of context - the most important one being "when alternatives aren't easily available". If you have access to a good critique group, or a Forum where you can seek a beta or a forum where you can post your work for free and get decent feedback - then why would you spend good money hiring an independent editor to do the same thing? That's the point that you need to be taking away from what SFWA says and that's why many of the AWers here will tell you that hiring an editor isn't necessarily.

As a side note - for someone who says they're not here to defend Algonkian - you are gong to a hell of a lot of effort to be contrary about what people here are saying. That's fine as everyone's entitled to an opinion, but I'd say that you can't then seriously be surprised when people are calling you on it or expression suspicions as to why you're here.

Rebecca Gallison:
ourse, given the rep of Absolute Write, any fantasy writer would be lucky to get free editorial services here.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you mean by this.

Any fantasy writer, crime writer, literary fiction writer, non-fiction writer, script writer etc etc etc can get a crit here for free once they reach 50 posts because that's all you need to post on the SYW Forum.

Alternatively, you can advertise in the Beta Forum here:

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=30

For a beta for free without any minimum posting requirements.

Luck has nothing to do with it and it's comments like this that make people question your reading comprehension and your motives in posting here.

Rebecca Gallison:
I have seen much energy devoted to negating the concept of pitching, and in general, however when Diane Holmes, the Pitch University person, posted a transparent marketing "pitch" for her business on this very thread a few pages ago, that caused hardly a ripple.

Click to expand...

Firstly, Diane was posting because another respected poster at AW (Old Hack) told her about the thread.

Secondly, Diane's post was not an advert for her site - her mention of it was to explain why she was commenting on the subject of pitching.

Thirdly, Diane makes the point in her post that "you NEVER have to learn to pitch *if* your only goal is to present your book to an editor or agent" - which is exactly what people here have been saying.

Fourthly, Diane then goes on to say why and when pitching may be of use to an author - none of which I would have any reason to question or cast doubt on as it seems pretty sensible.

Personally, I don't see the value in learning to pitch because agents and editors will go on the strength of your manuscript rather than the strength of your hook. However, being able to digest your manuscript into a pithy sentence can help when it comes to sell. The Algonkian conferences seem to focus on pitching as a key means of selling your books to agents/editors. It isn't. At the very best it's a foot in the door.

Rebecca Gallison:
Is she an advertiser at AW that she gets special treatment? In other words, why wasn't she taken to task for working with writers to develop "useless pitches"? If a pitch is a waste of time at a specific writer event why isn't it a waste of time everywhere? Are you saying that only pitches at Algonkian are somehow a waste of time but those at other conferences and at Pitch University are okay, productive, genuine? What about pitches at conferences in New York, other ones? What about at science fiction conferences? Haven't Tor editors taken pitches here and there?

Click to expand...

You're being disingenuous.

Rebecca Gallison:
My friend at Penguin bought projects from writers she received pitches from in New York, at the Algonkian event. Yes, really.

Click to expand...

Really - your friend bought on the strength of the pitch without reading the manuscript? Because that's what this is about. If you don't have a strong manuscript, then there's little point in knowing how to make a strong pitch.

Rebecca Gallison:
I would rather meet the editors and authors here in person than online. That's just the way I am. It's easier to talk, I like the face to face connection, and I like to socialize and commune with other writers. I think that's why lots of newbies go to writer conferences. People love to socialize. Online just isn't the same.

Click to expand...

I don't think that anyone here has said that meeting agents/editors in real life is a bad thing to do so.

Rebecca Gallison:
Can someone provide me the links to these sock-puppet blogs run by Algonkian. I researched and found no Algonkian blogs at all. I found one blog with Neff on it, his name on the mast, but that's it. What are the sock puppet blogs?

Click to expand...

I thought you said that you'd read through this Thread?

Links were provided by Stacia here: http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5805824&postcount=11

And then there were TamaraL's nasty little posts (since deleted). Seriously, you don't actually have to look very hard.

Rebecca Gallison:
Seriously, is it strange of me to come here and simply not take it all at face value? Is it wrong to ask these questions especially when I cannot verify any of this myself? Will more insults like the "freshman comp" thing come flying at me? I've seen a lot of folks get ripped up here for having a divergent viewpoint, especially Robert Bausch.

Click to expand...

Would you rather take Algonkian at face value than the posts here?

The purpose of this forum is to give people the means to ask questions and post opinions about publishers, agents, display sites etc. If you want to disagree with the opinions here, then that's fine but be prepared for people to question you and your motives in turn.

Rebecca Gallison:
I'm sure every sentence will be taken apart and the parts probed for weaknesses.

Click to expand...

Grow up. If you're not prepared to have people here question you and your motives when you seem very happy to question theirs then this isn't the place for you.

harrijsh:
You guys act worse than my high schoolers.

Click to expand...

Oh please. The last thing you get to do is take the moral high ground given your own behaviour here.

MM

I researched and found no Algonkian blogs at all.

Click to expand...

That's because the sock-puppet blogs don't have "Algonkian" on them.

I give you the Pitch Bitch. Who mysteriously failed to mention that she was a WebDelSol staffer and "guerrilla marketer" when she was running around talking about how to avoid the slush pile. It must have just slipped her mind. And whose blog somehow vanished as soon as her connection to WebDelSol and Pitch and Shop was discovered.

---------------
This, in case you're interested (which the Pitch Bitch never revealed and probably didn't know), is the reality:

Q. I'm a first-time author. What happens if I successfully pitch my book?

A. It goes on the slush pile.

Despite not having participated in this latest bout of discussion, and no longer being a moderator at AW, I got a long, angry "you and your people are meanies" email yesterday from Michael Neff.

Le sigh.

- Victoria

victoriastrauss said:

Despite not having participated in this latest bout of discussion, and no longer being a moderator at AW, I got a long, angry "you and your people are meanies" email yesterday from Michael Neff.

Click to expand...

That certainly speaks to professionalism. Or lack of same.

Rebecca Gallison said:

This is becoming a ridiculous argument, but it's started so I'll continue.

Click to expand...

Do as you think best.

I am not stupid, I don't need freshman comp, and I don't like being made to look foolish.

Click to expand...

I deny that that is within my power.

On the original subject of the claim being made here that Clarion publication rate is better than another writer event, specifically Algonkian's pitch in NY.

Click to expand...

No. That was not the argument.

The original claim about superior results was Algonkian's: that they, and only they, can teach aspiring writers what they need to know in order to get published. It's a false, misleading, and completely unwarranted claim.

Algonkian consistently disparages other workshops. As I observed in an earlier comment, Algonkian is the only workshop I know of that claims that all other sources of help and information for writers are inferior, even damaging. This is false. It's also unique to Algonkian. Other workshops don't do that, or anything like that.

That is what the discussion was about.

We don't normally talk about workshops in comparative and adversarial terms. You can check the archives of AW and see that for yourself. You can see from reading this very thread that the entity that first made claims about its comparative success rate, to the detriment of other workshops, was Algonkian. That's the only reason the subject came up. All else followed from it.

In the course of that discussion, it was observed that not only is Algonkian not the sole workshop whose students go on to sell their work, but it has a lower student publication rate than Clarion. (This is true. If Algonkian had a higher success rate, it would be as visible as a pillar of fire by night or a pillar of smoke by day.) You keep referring to Clarion's documented sales rate as a "claim," and going on in an obfuscatory fashion about what does and doesn't constitute proof, but the matter is not in doubt: Over time, about a third of Clarion's alumni have gone on to sell their work to respectable commercial venues. Quite a number have made successful writing careers for themselves, and some have received major awards.

It's all on record. There's nothing you can do about it.

However, let us suppose that only one-twentieth of Clarion's students had made commercial sales. That would still refute Algonkian's claim that their workshop is the only one that can tell writers what they need to know in order to get published. Their claim is also refuted by the sales made by writers who have attended other workshops, writers who've worked with critique groups and/or beta readers, and writers who've successfully pursued still other paths to enlightenment.

In short, if you truly feel this strongly about workshops that make unwarranted claims, the organization you should be taking to task is Algonkian.

Let's go back to the matter of what can and can't be proven. You've done a lot of flustering about that. What you were trying to say was that Clarion's student sales record does not establish the existence of a causal relationship between attendance at Clarion and later success as a writer. That's true. What you have there is not a causal relationship. It's a strong correlation. I am morally certain that many Clarion graduates would be happy to explain the difference to you at great length.

I believe I also spotted you asserting that one workshop can't validly be compared with another. I'd argue that a strong correlation over time with rate of publication is indicative if not determinative. But if there is any extent to which you are correct in saying that one workshop ought not be compared with another, Algonkian should damned well stop doing it.

One other correction before going further: the discussion was not limited to NYC conferences.

I want to make it clear I am not here to defend Algonkian, just to arrive at a simple truth or two --

Click to expand...

Nonsense. Of course you're here to defend Algonkian.

This is like one of those interactions on review sites where a never-before-seen pseudonymous poster shows up, claims to have no connection to a book that's just been given a bad review, merely wants to see justice done; and then proceeds to defend the book to the last trench.

I've been hanging out on the internet for more than a week. More than a couple of months, even.

which becomes more and more elusive and forces more and more argument as this develops.

Click to expand...

A clearer way to phrase that would be "increasingly difficult to defend."

If the purpose is to make Algonkian or any other event look inferior in comparison, --

Click to expand...

No. To repeat my earlier point, characterizing other workshops and events as inferior is Algonkian's trick.

then you use Clarion to demonstrate the other side isn't as good.

Click to expand...

The comparison with Clarion was made in the course of pointing out that Algonkian's claim is false and unwarranted; i.e., they're lying.

Then you quoted me (out of context) as saying "Clarion does have a good track record," and replied:

We have a "good" track record.

Click to expand...

"We"? The hell are you not here to defend Algonkian.

Saying that also put you in the position of:

1. Denying the validity of comparative track records, while
2. Claiming that Algonkian has a good track record, while
3. Suggesting that Clarion's well-documented track record is somehow fraudulent, while
4. Omitting to provide any information whatsoever about Algonkian's.

Then you added as a further counter-argument that I don't know Algonkian's sales rate.

Confidence and self-esteem are good things, and I'm glad you have them.

Click to expand...

victoriastrauss:
Despite not having participated in this latest bout of discussion, and no longer being a moderator at AW, I got a long, angry "you and your people are meanies" email yesterday from Michael Neff.

Click to expand...

I can't say that I'm surprised but I am a little disappointed. I'd have hoped he'd have just got his point across in a one line pitch ...

MM

Pitching

Thanks, Amergina. I just read Rebecca's post, and I was about to mention this.

amergina said:

Probably because the info on Diane Holmes's Pitch University website is available for free.

Click to expand...

Hi, Rebecca. I posted on this discussion after being sent a link by Old Hack, because there was mention of pitching not being needed to get an agent or editor, just a query letter (which I do agree with).

I'm very interested in the topic of pitching. And my sincere interest has led me to create Pitch U with money from my own pocket. And I don't charge my fellow writers. All the content is offered for free.

You're probably thinking, Why would you do this? Well, for the same reason writers have blogs and websites. We love to talk about writing and engage other writers.

There's a fine line between letting writers know there's this (what I hope is a) great resource and being seen as someone who is.... well, something bad, I assume.

So as the various writers on this thread have mentioned pitching and their feelings that it's not needed (lumping together feelings into one generic summary; no offense meant), I'm actively listening.

My feeling is that *of course* you can sell a book without pitching. In fact, this discussion is one reason why I'm asking myself, "Should I also focus on query letters?" I'm asking this question not because the skill of writing query letters is in question. It's a question because there are other sites that offer this information. I want to make sure what I offer is different than on other sites and worth making a visit. Otherwise, I'm wasting people's time. Don't want to do that.

I know I have a bit of a unique take on pitching, because I believe pitching to editors and agents is pretty much the same skill you need to talk to readers when they ask, "What's your book about?" It can help writers to be able to give a really quick, "here's what my book's about," that's interesting to the other person. (Just my opinion, so if you don't agree, I'm always interested in hearing your thoughts.) But my perspective (I have a marketing background, so that's my perspective) is that if the reader you're talking to reads that type of book, then your "pitch" could create a new life-long fan.

As I put content out on Pitch U, I've been introducing that idea (pitching to readers is the same skill), but I also have to deal with the reality that writers are most interested in the immediate issue of selling their books (to agents and editors).

Ultimately, I'd love half the content on the site to be devoted to the pitching that happens after the book is sold.

But let me again, say, if you want to learn to pitch to agents and editors at conferences, great. If you don't, great. The thing that matters to me as a writer is that my fellow-writers have the most success in their careers as possible (starting with writing great books).

So, no I'm not an advertiser here. Yes, I'd love to help writers with my website. Yes, I'd eventually like to have some way to support that site so that all the money isn't coming out of my pocket. No, I'll never charge writers to come learn or make a pitch at the virtual PitchFest Weeks I host. That's not my personal sensibility.

It's one of the things I like about AW: writers gather here to help each other and give their time for free.

Diana, I agree that pitching (in the larger sense of the word) has its place. When you look at how the publishing industry spends its time, a phenomenal amount turns out to consist of people describing books to each other. What I questioned was selling weekend-long sessions teaching face-to-face pitching to newbies as a core professional skill and the key to getting published. I also questioned the way this particular workshop is being sold.

What you're doing is a good idea. Some workshops are incorporating a bit of that into their curriculum, which is also a good idea. What I'd question is any workshop aimed at unpublished writers that makes face-to-face pitching a major focus of instruction. A good book will make up for all sorts of other deficiencies. Nothing makes up for not having a good book.

Rebecca Gallison said:

Is this why Medievalist made this insulting statement to me? I thought writers were given respect here?

This person has never read my word and she is jumping to huge conclusions as if I were a child needing freshman comp? I've been writing for many years, in different capacities, and a comment like this feels right out of high school, catty, petty. Rowrrrrr! What other conclusions are you jumping to?

Click to expand...

I'm speaking as someone with better than fifteen years experience teaching university writing and literature classes, and better than twenty years experience in publishing, on both the editorial and production ends.

You can't handle basic English syntax. You make frequent errors, not only here, but elsewhere (yes, I followed the bread crumbs dear) with respect to grammar and diction.

Moreover, you make patterned errors; that is, you engage in the same specific errors of syntax and punctuation repeatedly. Look at that quotation above; it's typical.

Rebecca Gallison said:

So SFWA does note positive reasons to hire the right kind of editor once you've taken things as far as you can take them. Like many others, it appears they recognize the value in an editor when the board members here insist that isn't necessary. Course, given the rep of Absolute Write, any fantasy writer would be lucky to get free editorial services here.

Click to expand...

SFWA in this case is me--I'm the author of the content on the Writer Beware website.

For context, I'm going to quote the entire passage of which you quoted one part--it puts a somewhat different spin on things:

Hiring an independent editor can be an expensive proposition. A thorough content edit from an experienced, credentialed editor can cost several thousand dollars, pounds, or euros. A basic copy edit may cost several hundred.

​

Do you really need to spend that kind of money? Before you decide, it makes sense to investigate alternatives–a friend who’s not afraid to criticize, a local writers’ group or critique circle, an online writers’ group, a creative writing course or teacher, a professional writer with whom you’re acquainted. Any of these may be able to give you the help you need, free of charge or at a fraction of the cost. (You should be seeking such sources of feedback anyway–no writer is capable of being completely objective about his or her work, and outside viewpoints can be very helpful.)

​

Still, there are circumstances in which hiring an independent editor may make sense:​

• If the alternatives aren’t easily available–or if you’ve used them, and still don’t feel you’re getting the feedback you need.
• If you’ve begun submitting your polished manuscript and are getting positive comments, but still are racking up rejections. Something’s wrong, and you aren’t quite sure what–or the rejections all seem to identify the same problems. Again, a good independent editor may be able to help.
• If you’ve written or want to write a nonfiction book on a subject in which you’re an expert, but you aren’t a professional writer. If your idea is marketable, an independent editor may be a good investment.
• If you’ve chosen a publishing option where editing isn’t available, such as self-publishing or a publishing service. A freelance editor and/or copy editor can help give your work a final professional polish.

Whatever your situation, hiring an independent editor shouldn’t be like taking your car to a mechanic (i.e., you go away for two hours and when you come back your car is fixed). You’ll get the most out of your experience if you treat it as a learning opportunity–a chance to hone and improve your own editing skills. Self-editing is an essential part of the writer’s craft. If you’re really serious about a writing career, it’s something you need to master.

​

There’s more on the vital importance of self-editing at Writer Beware’s blog.

​

See also this article by a professional copy editor, who explains why you need to master the basics of grammar and punctuation yourself, rather than relying on someone else to fix them for you.​

Click to expand...

- Victoria

Rebecca Gallison said:

... there are still 15 other professionals in New York that are working with writers, including Ginjer Buchanan?

Click to expand...

No question about it. Also, you've got the number wrong.

It's good to see someone saying nice things about Ginjer Buchanan. She doesn't get nearly as much public recognition as she deserves.

But here I am being somewhat contrary? Is this why Medievalist made this insulting statement to me? I thought writers were given respect here?

Click to expand...

That's the initial presumption, and we hold on to it as long as we can.

This person has never read my word and she is jumping to huge conclusions as if I were a child needing freshman comp?

Click to expand...

You keep going on about freshman comp, as though what's taught there is the only kind of error you could be making. What I'm seeing at the moment is one more writer who doesn't understand that their writing may convey more information, and different information, than they intend.

I've been writing for many years,

Click to expand...

So have we all.

in different capacities,

Click to expand...

That too.

and a comment like this feels right out of high school, catty, petty. Rowrrrrr!

Click to expand...

Seriously unimpressed. Your high school chums and LJ adherents didn't speak or write like the people in this forum. I'd think better of you if you'd noticed the difference on your own.

What other conclusions are you jumping to?

Click to expand...

No jumping. I'm observing and hypothesizing and occasionally concluding. You think you're entitled to be listened to, no matter what you're saying or how you're behaving. You think that having a big emotional investment in a subject automatically means your opinions about it are irrefutable. You don't yet have the knack of slowing down and moving carefully when an exchange starts to get rough. What do I conclude? Nothing, yet. It's just interesting.

Neverthess, I do understand the lesson re self-editing and I wish to learn that well, and eventually do it under the roof of Absolute Write. There's just some things going on here with certain personalities that I feel very uncomfortable about, and that I want to clear up before I become part of the club.

Click to expand...

That's a foolish thing to say. This isn't a club. It's a forum.

Maybe I'm getting hazed right now? Is Medievalist the appointed hazer? Do other writers posting newbie on here get told to take freshman comp?

Click to expand...

I'm still not impressed. Calm down. You're not being hazed. What's happening is that you're being disagreed with. When other participants think there's something the matter with one of your arguments, they say so. One of the things you learn when you hang out with other writers is that being able to string words together doesn't automatically mean you win.

I've never been insulted like this in any workshop I've ever attended.

Click to expand...

I doubt you've behaved like this at any workshop you've attended, either. Or possibly they just didn't care enough to argue with you.

On the SFWA page about editors, it says this with regards to hiring an editor ...

Click to expand...

Have you really not noticed that the author of that piece is one of the people you're arguing with?

So SFWA does note positive reasons to hire the right kind of editor once you've taken things as far as you can take them. Like many others, it appears they recognize the value in an editor when the board members here insist that isn't necessary.

Click to expand...

Nope. That's not what any of us said, and you definitely haven't understood what Victoria was saying. You've grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick with both hands and are holding on tight.

Course, given the rep of Absolute Write, any fantasy writer would be lucky to get free editorial services here.

Click to expand...

Oh, for heaven's sake. If you think that's a telling insult, I despair of you.