Weird question about nudging

Are you nudging on a query or a manuscript?

I don't think you should be nudging if it's just on a query. Usually if you don't hear from them after that, they're not interested. If you're nudging on an agent that requested work, I don't think you should worry about how your email is formatted.

Taylor,

It's true, many times no response on a query means a flat out no.

It sounds like you have nudged/will nudge more than once on this query letter. Once is okay, but no amount of nudging is going to get an agent to request your work. Either they are interested or they are not.

I never nudge on a query unless the agent guidelines specifically say to do so if they have not responded during a certain amount of time. Many agent guidelines say if there is no response by a certain number of weeks they are not interested.

That said, should I choose to nudge, I would do so with a new email and all the pertinent information. Otherwise, I feel like I am just sending my query letter all over again in a forwarded email. However, keep in mind that this comes from someone who non-nudges.

Whatever you choose to do, good luck.

You generally shouldn't nudge on queries unless the agent states they respond to all queries by X timeframe; then, it's generally okay. Aside from that, no response means no.

zegota said:

You generally shouldn't nudge on queries unless the agent states they respond to all queries by X timeframe; then, it's generally okay. Aside from that, no response means no.

Click to expand...

Another vote for this. Carefully read the submission guidelines of each agent you query. They almost always say what their response times are and a lot of them now have a statement similar to this one at Andrea Brown:

If we are interested in your work, we will certainly follow up by email or by phone. However, if you haven't heard from us within 6 to 8 weeks, please assume that we are passing on your project. We do understand and appreciate the effort that goes into getting your work out, and we wish we had time to respond personally to all submissions. Unfortunately, this is no longer a business reality given the amount of material we receive.

Click to expand...

Or more simply (like from New Leaf):

We only respond if we are interested in seeing your work

Click to expand...

Or if they have requested material they (New Leaf, for example) say this:

If we have requested your manuscript (partial or full) please do not contact us for updates any time before eight weeks.

Click to expand...

Not reading and following their submission guidelines will possibly do more harm for you then good. I would imagine it would annoy many agents who are too busy to deal with query nudges when they passed on your project. The NRMNs are frustrating, but unfortunately, it's just the way it is.

GL with the rest of your querying!

If you're not sure what the agent's time frame is, and you can't find the info at their site, you can check the average response times at Query Tracker or similar sites.

Assuming you are following the agent's guidelines, and the agent says follow up is okay, I would do the following:

1) nudge exactly once, then assume it's a NRMN.
2) send as a "reply" to the original email in Gmail--Gmail isn't stupid, and it will send to the recipient and not to you. OR send a new message and cut and paste your original query into the message just as you did the first time.
3) don't worry about the automatic text expansion/contraction that gMail does. Agents who use gMail will be familiar with that "read more" link (after all, you've seen it before, haven't you?). If you're really worried, you can include a line reading something like, "My original email is below, beneath the cut." Agents who use Outlook or Thunderbird or what have you will see the entire message, including the quotation of the first message.
4) It bears repeating...if the agent says they're not NRMN, nudge exactly once, then cut your losses and move on.

Taylor said:

How did this diverge into a lesson on the importance of following an agent's particular submission guidelines?

I am inquiring about those (plentiful) situations where agents do respond, thus it's appropriate to nudge.

If anyone has an answer to my original question, that would be wonderful. Thanks.

Click to expand...

People are just trying to help you avoid ruining your chances with a particular agent. The snark isn't really necessary for people who have your best interests at heart.

Taylor said:

How did this diverge into a lesson on the importance of following an agent's particular submission guidelines?

Click to expand...

If I ask you "How many Doritos should I leave on the table to tip the waiter?" would you say "twelve" or tell me that I should leave money and not Doritos?



(Assuming it's not a no response means no, and you know this for a fact, I'd just hit reply on the conversation thread and not worry about it.)

Taylor said:

How did this diverge into a lesson on the importance of following an agent's particular submission guidelines?

Click to expand...

Because you were not clear in your original question, which was:

When I nudge, I've been sending the email attached to my previous email to the agent, so they can see I queried them a couple months ago.

Click to expand...

Thus, it sounds like you are just querying on your own query.

I am inquiring about those (plentiful) situations where agents do respond, thus it's appropriate to nudge.

Click to expand...

Well, you didn't say this the first time.

If anyone has an answer to my original question, that would be wonderful. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Your question was answered:

should I choose to nudge, I would do so with a new email and all the pertinent information.

Click to expand...

Besides this, if you are nudging an agent who has responded favorably (requested pages or a full), then you can hit the reply button and just respond. Really, it's up to you.

Taylor, when you post a question you don't get to decide the direction the conversation will go.

Susan Littlefield said:

Taylor, when you post a question you don't get to decide the direction the conversation will go.

Click to expand...

It is true, however, that the general tendency on AW is for responders to assume "Absolute Lowest Common Denominator," i.e., that if you're asking a question, you're probably doing something that an uninformed person would do, like nudging agents who are NRMN. Particularly for posters with low post counts. It's because that's true--many, many MANY users come here with no sense of how any of this works and an unwillingness to read up on the vast amounts of information that is already here and that probably answers their question. So I do understand your frustration, Taylor. Stick around, and you'll understand why threads like this derail into an assumption that the questioner probably doesn't know what s/he is doing.

It behooves both the repliers and the poster to keep that in mind; I've found it a lot more helpful when I ask a question to be specific as to the exact situation and what I've done and what I already know about what could/should be done in this situation, or else the perfectly logical assumption, based on other users, is that the question asker probably is misinformed. And to try, when replying, to assume the person might have some sense of the right thing to do...but maybe, to use Buzhidao's example, to point out that Doritos...not so useful.

I mean, sometimes, I also go, "What are you, ign'ant?" But I try to assume best intent.

The only issue is that the OP was not specific, thus the type of advice received.

Wisteria Vine said:

People are just trying to help you avoid ruining your chances with a particular agent. The snark isn't really necessary for people who have your best interests at heart.

Click to expand...

this, Taylor.....it is important to get a feel for various forums, in this one folks are often very blunt. That said, they are also often very helpful, and very knowledgeable, which I value far more than niceties.

Hope you stick around,
Quick