Technically, it's not... I mean, I think I remember reading somewhere that you're not supposed ask for private critiques and help because it can detract from the value and use of the workshop, but it's not heavily enforced. When they say private, here, It's sort of like just you and the person who reviews it, apart from PMing or emailing someone. Still working these things out. Well when you get the time be sure to post something. New or not, you've got something valuable to say. Working on a sort of queue so that reviews can see posts that "need attention." And perhaps they aren't automatically stripped of the banner, but rather the admin is notified of their inactivity and the reviewer is given a notice to step it up. Regardless, we can't go around wearing the badge if we don't meet our requirements over a certain amount of time. Otherwise we're no different from regular members, and that defeats the purpose. Well it is a forum wide rule that you have to post at least 2 critiques for every piece of writing you intend to have critiqued, however, if you don't use the workshop much, there isn't much incentive to give critique, even though it can have equal benefit for the reviewer and the writer. The other point to the reviewing team was to incentivize more people to post work for critique by giving them some assurance that they'll get at least 1 or 2 quality responses... In hindsight, I feel like if people see that a "Reviewer" has replied to something might deter some less confident or busier members from critiquing... Well, it wouldn't necessarily be for general use. There would be the regular members in the workshop and a sort of regular reviewer. Then there would be members of the paid critique and beta reading team who would be compensated for their service. I guess what we're considering doing is offering a service to members and NONMEMBERS, that they can pay for and WF can receive some revenue from. But the people who provide these critiques would need some fair compensation for providing this service to WF, esp. if the WF were making a profit. They would almost be like employees or highly supporting members. We're still thinking about what would be fair compensation. The thing is, Daniel wants WF to grow, and I think offering a service is a great way to get more traffic, and bring in some $$ to pay bills or implement enhancements and such. That's what is meant by paid. The service is payable and different from the regular workshop, and these select reviewers would be rewarded somehow.. That's the talk so far... It's all behind the curtains stuff that I think you guys will be able to weigh in on soon. We'll have to wait to hear from the man on top.
I guess this goes for anyone in the discussion, I'm working late tonight, but I'm off for the next two days (I think), in which I'll be catching up on some reviews. If you have something that you want critiqued, just tag me in a comment so I can get the notification and go look at it. Otherwise, It may get skipped over as I peruse the Workshop.
In general, I'm with @chicagoliz on this one. While it's nice to think of getting paid for doing critiques, I think this is a non-starter. For one thing, we all joined this forum for free, and have been interacting for free. If we've chosen to support the forum with money, we can, but money isn't a requirement. I can't see people wanting to pay for critiques they can—and presumably will continue to—already get for free. So I expect what will happen is you'll go to a lot of bother setting up a system for payment ...and nobody much is going to bite. Who on this forum is going to pay another forum member for a critique? As far as non-members paying for a critique ...well, would you? At least we all know each other a bit, and have an idea of the quality of critique we'll get from certain members. But is somebody who doesn't know us at all is going to want to PAY for a critique from people with no credentials? Ummm...don't think so. If we're charging for our 'services' I think we need to prove that we are professionals, with critiquing credentials. Which most of us are not. Much better to promote the idea of beta-reading exchanges, which is already being done anyway, via PM contacts. I don't see a pay-for-critique option improving the forum at all, really.
That is the other part of it -- I don't know who would want to pay, especially if you don't know the credentials of the person critiquing. If I were to ever consider paying someone to critique something for me (which would be very unlikely), the critic would have to either have an MFA or be a successful author with several published novels or maybe collections of short stories. It's not that people without these credentials can't give some incredible, extremely helpful critiques -- it happens all the time. But if you were to pay for it, you'd want to have some inkling that you're paying for something that's worth at least what you've paid. I have seen critiques (not necessarily here, but in general) that not only were not helpful, but were actually harmful -- had the author taken the advice they would have made their piece worse. When it's free, you take that chance, but if it's in a thread, people can disagree. If you've paid for something you would either be less inclined to ignore it or you'd be really pissed you paid for something you find useless. And there'd be the danger people would be afraid to disagree with something a paid "professional" critic said.
ETA disclaimer: These thoughts on beta-readers are more general and don't include just the Reviewers: Would money, or some other compensation, work as an incentive for a critic (or a beta-reader) to offer more standardized (we'd need those standards first) critique and finish what they've started? 'Cause I'm thinking, if I was compensated for say a long beta-read somehow, I might be more motivated to finish it. I don't mean getting paid like an editor. It could be some other compensation too. A friend beta-read and critiqued my and T's WIP, so in return we read her published novel and wrote reviews on it on Amazon, and have promoted her work in our blog. But I might also be inclined to offer monetary compensation if I saw that the person had a good eye for critique. So I'm wondering would this kind of service still be useful, especially to those who have novel projects? In my case, I think seeing how they crit on the forum would suffice as a credential. I wouldn't pay a pro's salary anyway. I'm not sure about an outsider paying for the service, unless we can standardize and sell it credibly. Beta-read exchanges are great, and also my first choice for sure. Sometimes it's a hit and a miss, though. It can be quite frustrating when there is nothing but the beta reader's conscience keeping them around. I'm a slow but in general tenacious and thorough beta-reader, I finish what I've started even if it took me a while, but T and I had an annoying experience on this forum when we exchanged manuscripts with a user, beta-read his work, but he never finished ours (granted, he did get pretty far, so it was useful for what it lasted). I understand if a person doesn't have the time, I appreciate it when they let you know, absolutely no shame in that, but when they just disappear... Meh. So while I don't think pay-for-critique would work in the workshop, I am wondering, would some compensation to a beta-reader encourage them finish the work they've started? Sure, there'd have to be some agreement on how comprehensive the critique should be (most likely no line-by-line), some idea of the critic's skills, maybe a preliminary schedule of sorts based on the length of the manuscript (like they'd commit to send a two chapters per week critique etc.)... To me the biggest reason to offer some compensation would be to get a guarantee of sorts that they'd stick to the project. Of course, if it turns out they find the manuscript so horribly written or dead-boring it's not worth the peanuts, it'd be ok to quit. But if the compensation encouraged a good critter to stick with it, feel more motivated, etc. I don't think I'd mind paying for it. But this is probably more relevant to those who write longer pieces and don't have a critique group nearby.
I reckon no money, but be more discerning with who gets to be recognized as a reviewer. They should earn the badge and not just stick their hand up. You know, like a mod.
You're certainly thinking this through from all angles. And if a paid cadre of reviewers works for some, fair enough. However, I would hate to see this becoming too ...central? ...to what this forum is all about. Personally, I would never pay a beta reader. Nor would I accept money for beta reading. I feel if somebody can't or doesn't finish beta reading my novel (and yes this has happened!), then it says either that they don't like what I've done, don't have time or the inclination to give a detailed critique, or simply can't think of anything to say. I haven't really learned anything from these folks, so while it's annoying if it was a reciprocal read, I don't get bothered. I think if they were plodding or rushing through a critique ONLY because they're being paid, I would be very disinclined to take their advice on anything. Anybody can churn out a critique if they're being paid for doing it. But what's your guarantee of quality? It's a labour of love if you're not getting paid or required to do it. I think I'd prefer to keep it that way.
@jannert, I'll reiterate that it's been in discussion for a few weeks, so Kat's had some time to consider the arguments and possibilities. Don't get me wrong, I've had and raised the exact same concerns (almost word for word). I don't know if there is a large market for it, so w're thinking about keeping the prices low. Some research is still necessary. I personally joined the forum because it's free, and I believed that was good enough, but if I had the funds, I might be willing to pay a small fee for a solid critique or beta read. I would want to see some credentials or some ratings or something that suggests that WF reviewers are of quality. This almost speaks to @Selbbin's point of reviewers earning their places among the beta readers. We've discussed that in part as well. They would have to prove themselves capable of giving quality critiques, by which I mean thorough, detailed, organized and appropriate. This would likely be done by providing enough solid reviews to catch mod attention for potential promotion into this position. It wouldn't just be a show-of-hands sort of thing because Daniel wants to run it something like a business. These members would, in a sense, be working for WF. The idea of money in general is tricky material... The point is, in order to do more, WF needs some income. Likewise, Daniel would like to see membership grow. So we're thinking of ways to bring in more traffic, incentivize people to join with higher memberships (e.g. supporter), and provide things that people might want. I think @KaTrian has given a solid run down and has done a splendid job of holding down the fort. And as we've said, these are just talks, ideas. Nothing is set in stone. Most of our talk has been about what might be a good idea, what might work, how it might work, potential counter arguments and such, but hasn't gone too deep into planning any implementation. If we do offer paid services to members and non-members (with members of course seeing some benefits), then careful planning will be done. A standard would undoubtedly be set for style, length, and quality of critiques. Other forms of compensation to the reviewers are being considered. I think the thing to remember is not to let any of this make you uneasy. Nothing will be forced on anyone, and it likely won't affect how most of us use the sight. Yes, we did all join for free, and many of us are willing to support the forums financially, but the aim is to bring in enough revenue to make the site more self sufficient. That's on the business end, as I understand it. On the user/functionality end, the aim is to attract more people and be able to do more. No one would be forced to pay for a critique, they'd be choosing to pay for a crit. or beta read, kind of like paying for the convenience. The reviewers and betas would still be volunteering, but because they are providing a more extensive and intensive service, Daniel (and I, as well) believes it would be fair to provide some sort of compensation. The payment would also be insurance that the writer receives a full crit. or beta read, as something provided "professionally" from WF. Again, nothing is set in stone, there is still research to be done, discussions to be held. I'm kind of glad you guys stumbled this direction on your own because it was only a matter of time before you guys should/would have been brought to light. To be clear no one's comments here are considered less valuable or any less important. I think the biggest reason why this stuff isn't public from the start is to keep it from getting too bogged down in sways and/or causing too much unrest out in the open.
I don't think it'd become a huge thing, I'm not even sure would it work in practice, which is why this thread is super useful 'cause it helps us gauge interest and get more insights on a possibility like this. I couldn't ask to be paid 'cause I'm not a native speaker, so I'm automatically untrustworthy when it comes to grammar issues and such. Maybe a person who studies editing, creative writing, and literature? I'd be willing to offer some compensation, I think, but I'd want to see some of their work first. Maybe they'd do a sample chapter or something. Almost like hiring a translator student; they aren't qualified, but they do the job cheaper, and they have to do it well if they want more work in the future or positive recommendations. Yeah. It's a gamble. Like I said, I had the opposite experience. I'm not sure how likely this'd be? How many here on this forum would offer to do this just for the money, which would be peanuts anyway? I feel like you'd still have to love what you're doing, so it'd work as an incentive the way I see it. And if you (the passive you, not you-you!) did a crappy job, you would get a reputation of an uninspired beta-reader who can't recognize quality work even if it hit them in the face.
I'm not opposed to the idea of paid critiques, as such. The amount of revenue it might generate for this particular forum would be in direct proportion to how effective and how well-publicized this service would be. After all, 'critics' get paid all the time, in newspapers and magazines, don't they? The idea of being paid to review isn't too way out there. It's just that, for me, this isn't what the forum is all about. But if other people want this feature, I certainly wouldn't kick up any fuss. I just wanted to give my opinion. Which CAN change, BTW...!
Pardon me! I didn't mean to berate you with a long explanatory post. It turned out longer than I expected. You do raise very fair and valid concerns. I just felt I misrepresented myself.
Oh, I wasn't even thinking of you in particular when I wrote this! In fact, I think we crossed in the ether a bit. I just wanted to make my position clear. I have an opinion, but I wouldn't stand in the way if other people wanted to try this option. I just think it's not necessary. Not that it would be particularly harmful, but just not necessary ...and probably not workable either, in the long run. Aside from everything else, if you start paying people you become an employer, don't you? With all the red tape hee-haw THAT engenders. But I've been wrong before...
I'll just chime in to say that, if I remember correctly, the current idea is that the revenue from the paid reviewing (not including beta reading) will go 100% to the forum. Since the amounts are so small (just a few dollars) the reviewers will be "paid" in other ways (with supporter membership, i.e.). When it comes to the beta reading part the idea is to let the reviewers/readers get part of the revenue since the required effort is much higher than for reviews of shorter works. As for my general opinion in this matter: Paid reviews/beta readings would be a good source of income for the forum if we can get it to work and attract writers. On the other hand, the system should in no way remove the light from the possibility of using the forum to its full potential entirely free.
Yup, although of course nothing has been decided yet, and members certainly wouldn't have to pay for using the workshop, they wouldn't even have to take these paid reviewers' services either. I wouldn't see this a huge change that has a strong impact on what the forum is really about IF it happened. Like @jannert mentioned, I wouldn't ask money for my beta-reading/reviewing either, so I also think there'd still be free options available for writers who want their work critted. To be honest, I consider it a bit of an honor if somebody actually allows me to give feedback on their writing, considering that I'm not a native speaker (yet very eager to attack grammar and syntax problems nonetheless...). But I can also see the other side of it; the possibility of increasing beta-reader commitment, accountability, and quality with a paid service. Maybe. But I'm just guessing here, plus I'm kinda biased 'cause the latest revision of my and @T.Trian's WIP is close to completion which means we have to start hunting for new betas to take a look at the revision. Anyway, I'm glad people are chiming in here. Thanks for that.
As far as I've understood, that's the idea: the paid crits and beta-reads would just bring revenue to the forum, help cover the expenses, not to fatten the wallets of the paid betas/critics. In that sense, it would be nothing more than some members working to provide a little extra help in keeping the forum online and it wouldn't affect uninterested members at all, in practice. It would be nice to have some accountability for the quality and completion of critiques and especially more in-depth beta-reads. This is a little off-topic since it's more about MS swapping, but I believe it's relevant enough to bring up: there have been plenty of incidents where two parties exchange manuscripts, one party finishes the other's faster, and then the other, whose MS has already been finished, either vanishes without a trace or "fades away" with this or that reason that just so happens to appear shortly after their beta-reader finished critiquing their MS. Sure, it's always possible that the unfinished MS just sucked so hard that the beta-reader simply couldn't bear another chapter, but since I've heard of so many instances of such incidents, I'm inclined to think that's not the case; it would be too big of a coincidence that the stories start sucking right around the time when the author has finished beta-reading their swapping partner's MS. Perhaps it would be a prudent policy to do chapter for chapter crits/betas? At least that way, neither party finishes before the other, and if one party wants their MS fully beta-read, they also have to finish the other party's MS. This would affect all beta/crit swaps although mostly the ones done for free.
Exactly what do you mean with "chapter for chapter"? That each part do one chapter at a time and then hand it over, and you continue till the end of the manuscripts? If that's the case, don't forget that while one of the two writers might have an ms with sixty 10-page chapters, the other might have twenty 30-page chapters. So maybe doing a chunks of pages (say, 20 pages each chunk) and calling it "chunk by chunk" would be better.
@Komposten, yeah, that or part for part (or any suitably ambiguous term). "Chapter" was a poor word choice.
In case anyone's wondering, the reviewing team has done 88 reviews since the end of May and we are averaging 8 reviews per week. Actually, it's closer to 100 since there was one reviewer who didn't want me recording their stats. Not bad for 3 months. Not saying this to defend inconsistent reviewers, I'm saying it 'cause the group, as a whole, is accomplishing something for the forum. You know, if there's anyone who thinks the group isn't doing anything at all It is a busy time for members this month because of school and such, but have faith, I really expect the reviewer group to flourish. We just need more volunteers
The group as a whole has been awesome. My issue is that some reviewers are carrying others. While some have been brilliant, others have reviewed one a month, or less. One particular 'reviewer' has reviewed NOTHING since meeting the posting requirements months ago (yet posts their own work for review). That's just disrespectful to the rest of the reviewing team.
Those yellow reviewers ought to switch out their "review" pledge and instead use their time to enforce better formatting and grammar for workshop entrees. That would be helpful.