Actually we figured it out, but what are you doing to get all those quotes inside of quotes? Have you tried to fix it before you post? Does it happen in other threads?
I speak five languages, Jay. I work as a professional interpreter. In which language would you be able to understand that I have no stake in your take? English doesn't seem to be working. Never once did I make mention of the above-bolded sentiment. Not once. I have in fact indicated on several occasions that I divorce myself from any stake of any side of that argument. You, sir, would make a terrible interpreter. Your obvious and intentional misinterpretation, along with that present in every other post you have made in this thread, is what internet vets call trolling. No, no, no. Again, not interested in your take, and I use the phrase in its literal sense. No stake. Not angry. I am dealing with you because you are self-promo-ing your websites and your books in my forum, against the rules, and I couldn't help but note a few utterly fallacious bits of argumentation along the way, because, just as you profess is so important, I did go to school. I have a degree and several licenses in my field of work. The irony here is that I actually agree with you so far as the idea of education is concerned. I agree with that, silly billy. But your trolling? No, no, no. That is not on. I do have to commend you on your commitment, if nothing else. I "refute" views that I expressly indicate I am not engaging? A+ for creativity, though in a manuscript, this would be a plot hole. I hope you're writing high fantasy, because all that's missing here is some elven folk... Hmm... I didn't really expect the Mother Theresa card (cue philharmonic string section) until a few more posts. No, the stupid thing is that, post after post, you kept handing me every reason to ban you. You deliberately and maliciously misinterpreted every single one of my posts. Too many to bother quoting them. I may not have entered the conversation in my Sunday best, I'll admit, but I did shoot straight. No guile, no subterfuge, no artifice. You maliciously misinterpreted T.Trian: You maliciously misinterpreted and redirected Chickenfreak's words in equal fashion as you did to T.Trian: All of this to a degree that indicates you are either in need of psychiatric help or you are simply taking the piss on all of us. A long, steamy, trolly piss. And it is in no way the first time you have taken this piss. Since none of the mod team is into "water sports", this is definitely not your pissoir, and you've already had a time-out and clearly came back only to stir up trouble, farewell. I leave your posts where they are, undeleted, Exhibit A for the Record and for The People.
Back against the wall, he fought to the last word, the last letter. I don't agree with his method or tone--and few will miss him--but he's a damn good writer (like many other people here) with a badger's admirable persistence. That's how I'll remember him. I hope his book sales continue to go well, and wish him the best in general. As for the topic: @Augen Blick: Read a lot. Write a ton. Critique a sum, and get a sum critiqued. Try different things. Have fun. They all help to some extent, even the how-to books. Just keep at it.
i can't help admiring your skill at avoiding questions and finding imaginative ways of wording non-answers... but i also can't help being concerned about your reading and retention abilities, given this: which of course was NOT even close to either of the 2 questions i had asked twice, so far... and now thrice, with the second repeat of my questions below [with emphasis/specificity added, to help you in grasping just what is being asked]...
It's happened to me several times when I mismatch my start-quote, end-quote tags when I'm doing a lot of quote-respond-quote-respond. It doesn't reliably show up until I post, so I always make sure I look at my posted posts before I move on. It takes minute or two to fix. Edited to add: Though I confess that in the review room I gave up and just used the old Usenet-style quoting. If that seriously annoys anyone, let me know, and I'll try to break the habit. (Example: > This is Usenet-style quoting )
I may pluck these posts concerning the wonky BBcode and start a thread in the Feedback so Daniel can have a look and we can get to the bottom. It's never happened to me, the particular peculiarity in question, and I still can't reproduce the effect, much as I try.
@Okon - I'm going to have to disagree with you. His writing was, IMO, mediocre at best, and by his own admission he self-pubbed his last novel (odd for someone who claimed to know how to "get agents to say 'yes'"). His advice was sometimes good, but you'll notice he never went in depth, never posted anything for review and never gave any advice beyond extremely narrow confines. His "badger's persistence" led him to refuse to admit he was wrong, even when evidence stared him in the face, and when an antagonist persisted, his response was always to misdirect (as noted by @Wreybies above), to misstate, and, when necessary, to out-and-out lie. He was here, not for the benefit of the group, but solely for self-promotion. No, I will not miss him in the least.
Not entirely true. 1. He entered in the sci fi contest. Where is your work for the rest of us to see? 2. His advice did go in depth and was much more technical than the trite live and let live advice most members here echo. On a side note, I'm not sure how comfortable I feel here knowing other members are openly judging the writing abilities of other members, unnecessarily calling then "mediocre" for all to see. Doesn't that sort of attitude poison the writing spirit and make other members scared to submit their work,lest they be judged as well?
Didn't want to talk about the departed who can't post back and you've expressed my feelings very nicely, but, weren't all of JayG's novels self pubbed?
No. He had an actual publisher - Double Dragon eBooks. What bugs me is that at least once, and possibly many more times, he claimed one of his novels had a fairly impressive readership, but rather artfully did not claim it "sold" a lot of copies. I checked it out, and it turns out he was giving it away free as a Kindle download. It's right there on Amazon - price of $0.00. He never said it was free, he just said it had over six thousand readers, and claimed great success on that basis. Well, damn, I bet I could get six thousand readers if my book was free, too! That's just one example of how he would knowingly mislead people here. He wouldn't outright lie, but he'd talk around the truth without being completely open, and make people think he was more of an authority than he really was.
So JayG's left us? I hadn't realized. I'm sorry to see that. Sure he antagonized and berated almost incessantly, but some of his advice was pretty good. Perhaps this just wasn't the right place for him. In any case, while it is entirely fair game to comment on his writing as we would any other published authors, I won't participate in any badmouthing of our departed. Not to say anyone here is really doing anything but stating facts, It just doesn't seem right bashing. At the end of the day, he hasn't changed or tarnished my opinion, despite his pretentious, self-exalting manner of speaking. Will I miss him, though? Not in the slightest, as obstinacy is an ugly trait and one he showed a lot of (not to suggest it's anything but common among us humans).
Well, I suspect the reason he got cacked the first time is that he claimed Ed's writing was substandard—basing his professional opinion on Ed's work which he'd 'seen' posted in the Workshop. Odd, since Ed had never posted any work in the workshop. (Nor has Jay, come to think of it...) I don't think you'll ever find any critiques Ed has made that will make other people afraid to post their work or will 'poison their spirit.' Ed's remarks about Workshop pieces are always courteous, to the point, and kindly meant.
JayG did this same thing to me. I posted the beginning of a short story in the Workshop and he critiqued it. Some time later, after he and I had tangled many times over his (in my view) blinkered attitude, he told me my writing had improved immensely since his critique of my piece, so obviously I must have learned something from him. But here's the thing: I never posted a revision of the piece, and never posted anything else for review! So what the heck was he talking about? He was stating he was right and I was wrong, because I had obviously learned so much from him so my points were invalid, but the evidence he was citing was and is nonexistent! I pointed this out to him and he ignored it. He just restated his position, basing it on nothing at all.
Not true. 1. Fact. He needlessly called someone's work mediocre. 2. Fact. JayG entered the sci fi contest. You can 10k plus words of his right in this forum. More than you can say of ED. 3. Fact. JayG has spent a lot of time offering in depth critiques for people on the workshop. Not just "I like this" or "this is purple prose but I'm not going to give any proof that it is." His advice was technical and specific, whether you agree with it or not. I've seldom if ever seen a critique in the workshop from Ed, by the way. I'm not here to say whether he should have been banned or not. But I am saying it's tasteless to put down someone when they're already banned, and even more tasteless to call someone out by name on their writing.
Yeah, when I asked him to a question regarding his critique of another person's work, he started acting like the work was mine even after I said it wasn't. For whatever weird reason, he gets confused. That doesn't change the fact he spent his time offering technical critique, and some of his arguments were good.
Right, makes sense. I just read through the last few posts. Idk, I guess I just hate when the forum loses members. But what's been done has been done for the better, I suppose. Kudos to you mods for keeping the peace.
@123456789: Interesting, another side of JayG comes out. I don't like to see people banned. But you have to admit the mods overlook a lot of crap on this forum. I don't question their judgement to ban someone. I can't say I miss JJ_Maxx one bit. He couched hateful things in a facade that let him pretend he wasn't hateful. JayG is a different animal. He antagonized needlessly and repeatedly. Some people think I'm like that, but I'm not. Maybe I'm a tad stubborn and I often have an overly large dose of enthusiasm. That can come off as condescending when I've not intended it to be so. Can anyone say JayG didn't come off condescendingly on a regular basis? And often when there was no reason for it? I rarely bumped up against him. I avoided his posts because there was more ego there than I cared to clash with. But I will support the mods' decision here to ban him, even if he had useful things to contribute in the workshop. And I'm sorry to lose that contribution. One of his last entries was taking the time to post a useful comment for me in a thread I started asking for help. That makes me wish he could have been a bit more congenial. The mods have a hard job, and they volunteer for it. When someone causes so much distress in the forum, well, if the mods make a decision, I support it. Negative people draw out the worst in others and I can't say I miss that.
I stand by what I said, @123456789 , except I won't insist that Ed comments a lot in the Workshop itself. I don't have time to trawl back through all the postings to find any examples, and you might well be right that he doesn't comment THERE very often—if at all. However, he comments A LOT on the forum, on writing issues, and his comments are always encouraging and courteous—especially so to new writers and new members. As to his remark about 'mediocre' he was simply responding to another person's assessment that Jay's writing was 'good.' Both are opinions. It's okay to state one and not the other? Anyway... whatever. I've said my piece. Life beckons...
I want to make this clear before people get the wrong idea. JayG's banning was not just one moderator's idea. We discussed the situation pretty darn thoroughly. We all agreed that he had to go.
Well-said, @GingerCoffee. I sometimes wonder how you can be both so fierce at times and yet so sympathetic and eloquent at others. I agree with everything you've said. I'm not so much sorry that he's gone as I am that it had to come to that. We all tried pretty hard to help him interact more civilly with the community. Let this be a lesson to all... Big Brother is watching-- I mean, er, best be on your best behavior. Mind your p's and q's, and cross all your t's and dot your i's. We have a good community here, let's not muck it up with sullied character.
Jay pretty much did the same to me earlier in this very thread. Granted my workshop entry is pretty terrible. I'd only just started to take my writing seriously and was posting to see if there was any writing aspects I particularly needed to be focussing on, (not that I claim to have become an expert in the intervening nine months) but my point is he seemed to be posting about it specifically to try and discredit me rather than to offer me critique.
I think I speak for all the mods when I say that I agree. Perma-banning is a major step, and it is never taken lightly. Hey, we're not that bad! We're more like Little Brother - no, wait, we're Cousin Jimmy. Or Aunt Edna. Or Bert from Accounting.
Nah you guys are total monsters, creepin' on all our bees' knees from behind your computer screens like there's no such thing as insect privacy. Oookay... then, I think that means it's time for this dude to go to bed. I'm getting loopy. Goodnight folks! Remember, you are good people.
I don't like bashing anyone after they've been banned, but discussing the quality of their writing, I think, is ok if they've brought it up first themselves, i.e. they've "opened the door" as Jay did, using his own works as examples of writing done right, so it's not like Ed or anyone else just randomly decided to start judging his works. Besides, he's a published author (regardless of whether the books in question were published through a legit publishing house or self-pubbed), and discussing published authors, their writing, the quality of their works, is perfectly acceptable as long as it's not malicious slander only seeking to besmirch the author. I mean, if Stephen King registered as a member here and started posting in our discussions, people should still be allowed to discuss his books, his writing etc. in here as long as they follow the rules while doing so.
