not even a form reject?

I drives me crazy too! I can kinda understand though, now we can email submissions it's far cheaper to query so they get more queries and it takes time to send out all those rejections which means less time for everything else... I'm still convinced someone could set up an automated system to do it though.

Oh, but wait. We're about to hear from the AW "no agent practice is ever wrong" crowd.

caw

This botherings me as well, however, if they state it on their website that's the policy, fine, I can handle that. It's the ones that don't, and you just never hear from them. That's way more irritating.

I'm fine with a no response policy on queries. What bugs me is agencies who don't respond on requested material.

But I have a bit of paper in my hot little hands that tells me my days of griping about the querying process will soon be over, hopefully for good.

blacbird said:

Oh, but wait. We're about to hear from the AW "no agent practice is ever wrong" crowd.

Click to expand...

Really? There's such a crowd at AW? I've never seen any evidence of it, and I hang out in this part of AW all the time.

Want to hear something even worse? Some editors have adopted a no-response-means-no policy, too.

AlishaS said:

This botherings me as well, however, if they state it on their website that's the policy, fine, I can handle that. It's the ones that don't, and you just never hear from them. That's way more irritating.

Click to expand...

I feel the same way. And most agencies that do this give a time frame (ie "if you don't hear back in X weeks, that's a no.")

So I have in my Excel sheet the date a query was sent out and how long before it's an official no. If that day passes with no word, I mark the status on the sheet from "Waiting" to "rejection" and that's enough closure for me. It's not like the rejection letter was going to say it any kinder.

If agents want to take longer than their policy states and I get a request for material after I've already assumed the answer was no, well, that's a nice surprise for me, then.

Terie said:

Really? There's such a crowd at AW? I've never seen any evidence of it, and I hang out in this part of AW all the time.

Click to expand...

If someone defends an unpopular practice it therefore must mean that they worship agents and think they can do nothing wrong obviously. Didn't you know that?

What blacbird so delicately was referring to . . . there are A LOT of threads on this topic, and eventually people will come along and explain why the practice takes place, even if we as authors don't much like the practice.

I for one understand it even if I don't like it (of course closure is nice - but it isn't necessary). As an actor I never hear anything from anyone unless I get a callback or have got the part. So I'm pretty used to it.

me too

How about the guys who mail you back a full year later. yeah! a full year later, like seriously?

Just tossing this out . . .

It's not an agent's job to take care of the feelings of a writer whose work he/she doesn't want to represent.

I don't like dangling either. That's another good reason to send queries out in bunches and to start your next book/story.

I actually don't have an issue with "no response means no," provided that there's some kind of auto-reply/confirmation that the query was received.

Even copy/pasting a form rejection can take, say five seconds. Doesn't seem like a lot until you multiply that 5 seconds by, say, three to five hundred (or more), for the number of queries an agent typically gets in a week. And as others have said, an agent has no responsibility to the writers s/he doesn't represent.

BUT. It takes only a minute or two to set up an auto-responder for a query email address. I have an auto-responder for my reader group, and now anytime someone sends an email to that group they instantly get a reply saying their info was received and they'll be getting an update soon. It wouldn't be difficult at all to set one up that says "This is an automatic response to let you know your query was received. If we are interested in seeing more of your project you'll be getting another email within the next 4 weeks; if you don't hear from us in that time, please assume your project isn't right for us at this time. Thank you for querying us." Or whatever.

For me the bad part isn't not getting a rejection, it's not knowing if the query was actually received. An auto-responder would fix that, you know?


But I absolutely think no response to requested material is wrong. You asked for it, and you should let people know what you think, if for no other reason than that if they get an offer they then don't waste their time or another agent's time contacting you.

I agree with Stacia. The no response = no but with an auto-responder at least lets me know it was received and the no response wasn't because it hit a spam filter or got lost. Those don't bother me.

And I've gotten no responses to even requested fulls. Those guys don't get requeried. (Especially the one that required a mailed manuscript. That cost me money, dude. The least you could do is let me know it even arrived).

Rock stars get panties thrown at them from fans all the time, too. That doesn't mean they owe them a response.

I wish more agencies would set up auto-responders for emailed submissions. That would at least tell me the query arrived.

I hate the "no response means no" thing too; and I agree that an autoresponder would really help.

But I also was flabbergasted the last time I saw how many email submissions agents get lately. If you had 1,800 emails from people you don't know waiting for you after a few days off work, would you take the time to reply to each one or would you simply delete the ones you knew you weren't going to be able to do business with?

Especially considering that agents with very simple and easy-to-follow query instructions on their websites lament the fact that around 80% of queriers get it wrong.

I think a lot of things agents do is wrong, but No response means no doesn't bother me from anyone, and some magazines have had this policy for twenty years or more. So have some book publishers.

Auto-responders are a pain in the ass, an invitation to spam, and not always reliable, at that. Using auto-respond is fine, if you have a sophisticated system set up, but few agents or editor have such a system, and don't need one.

If you pay attention to submission guidelines, the agent's spam folder is not going to snatch your e-mail, and if it doesn't arrive at all, and good e-mail system will tell you it wasn't delivered.

It's just never bothered me. Wait your two months, or whatever the guidelines say, and move on. Agents and editors are often overworked, often have no one else who can handle rejections, and deal may have to deal with thousands of writers.

I understand wanting closure, but the time factor often is more important than any individual closure. If an agent or editor had to deal with ten writers per week, I could understand the frustration. But when an agent or editor has to deal with hundreds per week? Nope.

Karen Junker said:

Rock stars get panties thrown at them from fans all the time, too. That doesn't mean they owe them a response.

Click to expand...

True, but I don't think it's the best analogy. I equate rock stars and other musicians to writers, not to producers and agents. Musicians and writers offer the product of their talent, sweat and, sometimes, tears—a song, a performance or a book. Agents, producers and editors are in the business of soliciting those products. Not acknowledging the offer is wrong.

Doesn't bother me at this point. I can't control what an agent does, I only control what I do.