And those three quotes that it inserted at the end are just "features?" Sorry, but I spent forty years in computer design, and that included writing my own code. Your system isn't as bug free as you suppose. Easier to deny than fix though, I guess.
I didn't call you a liar or anything, so just settle down. I said I haven't encountered the problem, neither has another person, but that if you still do, it's better to start a thread about it in the appropriate section of the forum or PM a mod to get it fixed than to derail this thread, yes?
The amount of snark and smug you produce violates the law of conservation of mass. You've been back, what, a week? You're GMROI dipped into the red on day three and is headed south. See, this is the part that you don't seem to understand as regards the paradigm. You want to argue your dogma and beat your little chest and I'm willing to put up with a certain level of assholerie from any member as long as the dividend is greater than the cost because it's all business to me as a mod, dear sir. Business. Cost v. Return. Any good merchant, once they see a piece of stock is not returning a profit, or at the very least, breaking even, liquidates that stock in order to make room on the sales floor for other merchandise with better prospect for sale. This is what I mean when I tell you that you seem to be confused as to the arrangement, though I am quite sure you understood me perfectly well and were just using the opportunity to misdirect the audience with your slight of hand, smoke and mirrors. And speaking of slight of hand, because I can already see your little wheels spinning, axles smoking, allow me to explain in detail the rest of the paradigm of GMROI in this forum for the benefit of all before you corrupt my Quenya into your Olog-hai: The huge, vast majority of the forum members are all cost-free investments in the paradigm. They come to the forum, they use it for its purpose and they cost nothing at all to maintain. Nothing. They don't even know who the mods are because they have no reason to. That is the description of the vast, vast majority: Cost-free. There are some few members who are cost-free, the return on whom is an embarrassment of riches. Would that I could clone them! There are some few members who do have an appreciable cost, but their return is still greater, their gross margin is in the green, so they still represent good investments. And then there are members who cost more than they return, and since you seem so fond of twisting the way numbers work, even when the return is high, or very high, if the cost is greater, if the gross margin is in the red, the investment represents a loss and is to be liquidated. Do you understand now, sir? Continue to take the piss, as my brethren across the pond are fond of saying, and this story is already written.
...none of that answers the questions: ...though, i suppose you did, in a sense, by what you didn't say?... ...as for " being the only male in a room full of women," how could 'don' or 'noah' be there, if you were the only male?...
I think you give good advice JayG but you're really going about it the wrong way. You're assuming your advice is way superior because you've had connections, done your research, and made some discoveries. The trouble is your advice is rather rigid and doesn't always fit the writer or their goals. Not every writer wants to be salable. If I wanted to be salable I wouldn't write about worms, or talking cockroaches or men who grow on trees. I would clean up my sentence fragments and make my characters more commercial. There's two ways of being noticed by a publisher ( I've done my research too ) - a clean story or an exceptional voice. It's not to say either option shouldn't have the other it's just that sometimes they don't. Maybe lighten up a bit. This is just a writing site, it's fun, informative, free - it's not a guaranteed course to make you the next Stephen King. Not that any course, place in the world could ever guarantee that. And that probably isn't everyone's goal anyway. Have fun, writing is about discovery not just about finding out what works and running with it.
You give evidence that what I say is inaccurate. You can't. You don't point to some publisher or teacher who supports your view. There are none. And you find my assertion that one must acquire professional knowledge to write like a professional undesirable. So instead of discussion you threaten the messenger. I coerce no one. I force no one to write in any way. That's a free choice every writer makes, And most of my posts are in response to people insisting that the techniques of writing fiction that the publishers espouse are unnecessary. And the most vocal of them do that without having managed to sell anything to demonstrate the superiority of their methods. But you're not angry with them, of course. Only with me for pointing out the things they would learn in any workshop, course on writing fiction, conference, or in conversation with the pros. Since the last time you abused your position. Yes, and here you are attacking me in a way no member would be permitted to do, and then blaming me for daring to refute the "popular" view with facts. Sure. You're a hopeful and dedicated writer who has worked very hard on your writing, over a significant time, but hasn't managed to sell anything. And if the people I talk about are right in what it takes to make an acquiring editor smile you wasted a lot of time using techniques those publishers deem less than professional. And that would be a bitter pill to swallow because it means starting from scratch and mastering an entirely different approach to presentation. But of course, you have the authority to shut me up so you can go on believing you're just unlucky, and close to publication. I see that attitude a lot from people in your position. It was probably mine till a paid edit of one of my novels showed me just how wrong I was. But who are you punishing by cutting my connection? Me? Or is it the members who contact me for writing help who will no longer get it? Does it really help the members become better writers to silence the voice of someone who was paid to tell people what was keeping them from publication, and who managed to talk a few editors into saying yes to his own work? The stupid thing is that I could tell you exactly where you're having trouble, and where the editor stops reading, and how to fix it. So you're not hurting, or inconveniencing me.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] By the way, those two close quotes you see above were inserted by your software, not my typing.
For the nth time, I've made damn few discoveries. And if you think that the result of "doing my research" is no better than the result of just having a feeling, or talking to people who know no more than yourself there's nothing to discuss. I am not, and never have been, giving my own views. What I say is what you would read in any book on writing, hear at any workshop, or class on writing. It's a profession, and as complex as any other, so there are as many basic things that must be learned as in the general writing skills we learn in our school days. You're not prepared to write screenplays, though you've watched TV. Why would you be prepared to write fiction? Is it easy? Not according to either the publishers or the rejection rate. If the goal is to be published the rules are made by the publisher and fit their needs. Ours don't count. And they especially don't count if we don't have a realistic knowledge of what that publisher expects to see. They are the customer and they are always right, even when they're wrong, in our view. Then who cares how you write? If you're just going to show it to others, who will say nice things so you'll read their work it doesn't matter how you write. This section of the site is about writing, and people are asking questions. Did you ask the one who started this thread if their goal is just screwing around or if they really want to sell their work? And given that you aren't trying to please readers of fiction, why would you give a damn what I say...unless you don't want to be reminded that readers will judge you against the published fiction they read. In the end, you're really saying that you don't want me to help people who actually want to write for publication because you find it uncomfortable. What have you got against them?
He still doesn't get it. If one uses the "reply" function, the system automatically places the replied-to post in quotes. After that, if one breaks down the replied-to post into segments, each QUOTE must be paired with a /QUOTE (deliberately omitting brackets, here). If one fails to pair them exactly, the system will automatically stick a /QUOTE at the end, thus scooping one's newly minted wisdom into a single quote block. The fault, my dear Brutus, lies not within our stars, but within ourselves.
To be fair, I have issues with the quote code often when I copy some things from links. It's very annoying. The forum software inserts quote code, I delete it, and the forum just puts it right back in. I have to do work arounds to get rid of unwanted inserted code. I never have the issue with straight replies. Regardless, I can empathize with having code inserted I didn't insert. The forum software has some bizarre quirks. Not that that excuses the attitude.
Forgive me for answering a couple points at a time, I have a WIP that needs more work before critique tonight. You have no evidence of this. It's an unsupported assertion. It might be intuitive, but that is not a guarantee it is correct. Consider the coach that doesn't have the physical skills to be the champion, but knows exactly how to cultivate the person who does have those skills. Here you've added 'teacher'. That would be the 'expert' you dismissed earlier.
Well, if the question was if Don's my buddy, no. Our connection is purely about his profession and the profession. And the times I met him were either at a workshop or when he came down on a Saturday morning to visit the chapter to talk about writing, and what it takes to get an agent to say yes. And a good part of that was a comfortable Q&A session. Lunch, and a chance to talk more personally, was a bonus I mentioned to show that the man wasn't just someone I heard talking for 100 feet away from the stage.
No guarantee that it's better to talk to the pros than people casally interested in writing? Of course I do. How often do people drop in here shouting about how they've had a publisher say yes, based on what they learned here? If the percentage had more than two zeros after the decimal place it's statistically irrelevant. But that aside, the assertion that you can learn professional skills from people who cannot display them, themselves, is an absurdity. A stopped clock is right twice a day, but I would depend on it for the time. Skills learned under the guidance of a pro, who had to certify them as competent before that could hold the position. Any office is filled with Monday morning quarterbacks who will be glad to tell you exactly what the coach should have done in the last game. If you go to them to learn the skills of the professional football player you're making a serious mistake. One teacher I suggested wrote and sold seventy-five novels. He also held the position of professor. Another used to fill lecture halls when he went on tour. Both are respected and honored by the publishers. Those men were were pros. But you figure you can learn as much, and as quickly, from someone who heard what someone else thought was right on a forum like this? I sure as hell wouldn't base a career on it.
Why does everything have to be an argument and not a discussion? You totally misinterpreted my entire post and saw sarcasm when their was none. I said your advice was good. Writers do need to learn the basics but you're still going about it the wrong way. Be a little more humble, and a little more open. I've read the same books you've read. I was given the Writer's Digest how to publish books - In fact I think I have the first editions. Because I don't quote them does that mean I don't have a worthy opinion or advice? Because I haven't personally talked to a publisher does that mean I have no authority to call a flat character flat? I know my advice is a little eclectic and perhaps too influenced on my own style - but whoopee - take it or leave it, I've never claimed to be an expert just someone who loves to write. If I was an expert I'd be charging a fee- But isn't that insinuating a lot of us are going by feelings? Yes, a damn few are considering there's no requirements to the site. But there's quite a few here that have great advice - that maybe they've culled from books and articles, and their own research, and their own writing contacts. And keep in mind the people we study - the published writers, they learned & studied but they also grew by forging their own path ( especially the ones we admire the most. ) You're making writing too cut and dried. I didn't say mine couldn't be sold I'm saying I don't write with a merchandise frame of mind. I'm not saying that's wrong in fact it's beneficial if that's what you have in mind. It's just not necessary to become successful. I have no problem what you say, in fact I'm one of the ones that liked your initial advice! It's what you went on to insinuate - that none of us are qualified to give advice based on the fact that none of us make a living at writing. There could be someone on here who will go on to sell books, maybe become famous. Why dismiss advice based merely on credentials or rather lack thereof? After all this is a writing forum. Not the published writers forum. My readers will judge me no matter what publishing venue I chose, there's no escaping that.
This ^. I'm going to proceed as if it can still be turned into a discussion, but it's really up to you @JayG to drop the better than thou pretense. You have opinions, others have opinions. Facts are a different animal. [quote="JayG"]But on the other hand, asking someone who hasn't been able to sell their work what needs to be done to make my work salable pretty much guarantees the advice won't be on point.[/quote] [quote="JayG"]No guarantee that it's better to talk to the pros than people casally interested in writing?[/quote] Is it that your goalpost moved, was it my misunderstanding who you were referring to when you use the word, 'expert', or, did you make a false assumption that everyone on a forum are people only casually interested in writing? [quote="JayG"]Of course I do. How often do people drop in here shouting about how they've had a publisher say yes, based on what they learned here? If the percentage had more than two zeros after the decimal place it's statistically irrelevant. But that aside, the assertion that you can learn professional skills from people who cannot display them, themselves, is an absurdity. A stopped clock is right twice a day, but I would depend on it for the time.[/quote] That would be false assumption that things we learn here are all we ever learn about writing. Where does this idea come from? We all have lives outside the forum. [quote="JayG"]Skills learned under the guidance of a pro, who had to certify them as competent before that could hold the position. Any office is filled with Monday morning quarterbacks who will be glad to tell you exactly what the coach should have done in the last game. If you go to them to learn the skills of the professional football player you're making a serious mistake.[/quote] Let's get back to this one original point here because your posts are all over the map and I can't tell what you are asserting. You started by quoting, “Michaelangelo did not have a college degree, nor did Leonardo da Vinci. Thomas Edison didn't. Neither did Mark Twain (though he was granted honorary degrees in later life.) All of these people were professionals. None of them were experts. Get your education from professionals, and always avoid experts.” ~ Holly Lisle. Then you said: [quote="JayG"]But on the other hand, asking someone who hasn't been able to sell their work what needs to be done to make my work salable pretty much guarantees the advice won't be on point.[/quote] I replied: Being a published writer doesn't guarantee one is a good writing teacher, just as being an excellent writing teacher doesn't require one be a best selling author. Stop moving your goal post and get back to this intuitive but demonstrably false assumption. You claim that being published is evidence of a skill. Yet we know there are thousands of crappy books on the book store shelves. You said being published suggested the author would be a good source for writing advice. I noted that Orson Scott Card and Stephen King both have how to write resources that didn't work for me. You said not having any published work was evidence that person would not be a good source of writing advice. I pointed out one of the best writing advice books I've read so far was that of Lisa Cron, and her advice book was her only published work. I dare you to read that book and come back here telling us it wasn't full of excellent advice for writers. You'd be lying. So just what is your issue here? And where are your facts, not your anecdotes or your intuition, that only people with published works can possibly know what it takes to be published? ****Look at that weird stuff, what's wrong with my quote code for @JayG's quotes that didn't happen with my GingerC quotes? I'm leaving it instead of fixing it to show the mods there are weird forum code problems.
I took a look at your post and yeah, you used the same exact tags, but only the GingerC ones worked, oddly enough. The way I multiquote is that I take the first quote tag, e.g. in this case it would be: [QUOTE="GingerCoffee, post: 1225945, member: 53143"*] except without the last * and then just copy / paste that before every section of your post that I want to quote and add [/quote*] in the end of those bits (of course without the *). So far that's worked for me. Just FYI until / if we get that weirdness sorted out.
I know all that T, I was just using a shortcut to multi-quote without a big hassle. I did exactly the same thing on Jay's quotes as mine. Something in Code: [quote="JayG"] is messing up that isn't visible in the text on my screen.
I know you do, but clearly not everyone does, even some with extensive computer expertise far overshadowing mine (as I can barely work the thing), so I figured I'd explain it so that even those people could multiquote properly while the issue persists.
Well, since the system seems to be getting creative with quotes I'll use bullets. • I'm going to proceed as if it can still be turned into a discussion, but it's really up to you @@JayG to drop the better than thou pretense. So I have to pretend that twenty-five years of listening to the same questions over and over didn't happen, that I've not talked to publishers, have never been paid for my work, and know no more than anyone else? No. I worked damn hard to learn what I know. And the advice I gave my clients was to the point and accurate. I make it a point not to give my own opinions unless they're labeled as such. And the people I quote aren't guessing. People paid them, and the university a lot of money to teach them the skills of the writer. I will not reduce that to just someone with an opinion standing in front of the class. Today I got a royalty check from Amazon. Since last November nearly eight thousand people have picked up a copy of one of my books. Shall I pretend that didn't happen, and the knowledge that was used to write them is of no more value than that of someone who hasn't taken the steps to learn the basics? I have something to give. And as payment on a Benjamin Franklin debt I do that. It would be false modesty for me to pretend that it was just luck. I'm not a pro and make no pretension to being one. But I do have a pretty large store of professional knowledge. And as an engineer it's part of my training to know where to find what I need but don't know. And of more importance, having made all the mistakes myself, and taking my lumps for it, I'm in a good position to say, "This doesn't work, and here's why." I'm sorry you feel that sharing that knowledge, in response to a question asked in the forum is a display of "better than thou." • That would be false assumption that things we learn here are all we ever learn about writing. Where does this idea come from? By reading their posted writing, of course. If someone has learned significant craft it's visible in a paragraph or two. • You claim that being published is evidence of a skill. Yet we know there are thousands of crappy books on the book store shelves. And have one or two lousy ones there myself. So what? You confuse knowledge of how to write and your own personal tastes in writing. Just because you don't like a given book doesn't make the writing poor. Every book you look at represents writing that convinced a publisher to say yes. That publisher invested significant resources bringing it to market. And they did that only because they thought it was written well. They are our customer. The reader is their customer. So before anything else you please them. Fail that any you're not even in the game. • You said being published suggested the author would be a good source for writing advice. I noted that Orson Scott Card and Stephen King both have how to write resources that didn't work for me. No, it was advice that you didn't like, or agree with. That's a very different thing. You're also making the unjustified assumption that because some of what they said "didn't work" that somehow justifies taking advice from people who can't sell the result of taking their own advice. It doesn't. Such people are useful as reader reaction people, but not professional advisers. • You said not having any published work was evidence that person would not be a good source of writing advice. They're not. How can you trust the advice of someone who can't make their own advice work? It might be accurate or be the thing that got them rejected. You have no way to tell. But with a pro you at least know it works for them. And if several pros say the same thing...
"Properly" It can be annoying, especially when one can't find the coding error and one has to play trial and error with preview or edit to fix it. I'm just saying maybe @JayG deserves the benefit of the doubt on this one. I don't recall the quote within a quote having been an issue with him before or in other threads.
I know, I know, I just meant "properly" as in so that it looks "proper." It's not the most convenient way, but at least it allows people to see the name of the person you're quoting in each section of the post and it produces the convenient arrow next to their name that you can click, and it takes you straight to the post you're quoting, so with a bit of effort, the posts can be made "proper" while the issue is being sorted.
Turns out copying a 'proper' quote was the source of the problem. I just PMed Wrey. I found the hidden code that was messing up the quotes. Now if I can just figure out why the forum sometimes adds quote code where I don't want it. My solution is probably not going to help whatever @JayG's problem is but maybe it will offer a clue.
• I took a look at your post and yeah, you used the same exact tags, but only the GingerC ones worked, oddly enough. It's me. Everyone will tell you I'm odd.
