Mods, How old is "too old" for an excerpt submitted in the Workshop to be dug up and dusted off for fresh review? I received a scathing critique from my coworker after sending her the first 4 chapters of my WIP, some of which is posted here in the Workshop. I was told a year or so ago that as long as the scene is roughly the same as its original submission in terms of content, it can be re-posted in the same thread as long as its original post is referenced in the reply, and people can go ham critiquing. (And since it'd be the same thread / same scene, I wouldn't need to do 2 more critiques for others to re-qualify my work.) Is this still the case? If so, is there an "age limit" on submissions in the Workshop? While my coworker's review did sting, it was nonetheless useful and productive - I'd like to post the resulting edits here (Workshop) for further discussion. Thanks in advance for answers
Personally, I would be fine with bringing up old threads. There are no hard rules about age, but there is one about keeping the same story/excerpt to the same thread. So as long as it's the same scene/excerpt it should be fine in my opinion. However, I will tag the other mods so they can express their opinions too. @KaTrian @T.Trian @minstrel @Kingtype @Mckk @Wreybies
I'm not an admin, but I see zero problem with resubmitting what is approximately the same work, to the same thread, no matter how long it's been.
As far as I'm concerned, you can go ahead and critique old work. Who knows? It might set off an interesting discussion. Just be aware that, with many of the old, old threads in the Workshop, the original poster may not be around here any more.
Thanks guys! I'll polish up my edits and get them ready for critique. Good to know for critiquing old work — also, if the original poster isn't around anymore, would giving a critique on their submission count toward the 2-for-1 rule?
Sure. It's the same critique, and you did just as much work on it. Besides, the critique is more for your benefit than the original poster's. Also, the original poster might just return after a prolonged absence (we don't delete accounts on this forum), and they might still find value in your critique.
My memory is growing dim, but didn't there used to be a rule against resurrecting old Workshop threads? By the writer, not the critique-giver? I forget the term used, but it meant bringing an old thread to the fore, so it appears at the top of the list again? Has that rule been changed, or am I missing something? I'm perfectly happy for old critique threads to be resurrected, especially if there have been some major changes made. But I thought that was forbidden. Just want clarification. .......edited........ This is from the current Reviewing FAQ section: Q: I posted a story for review and it is moving down the thread and about to disappear to the next page. What do I do? A: Refer to the above answer. Don’t bump your thread to get it back on top. That is against forums rules and will result in an infraction.
You're not wrong. I don't remember off the top of my head how the rule is actually written, but it was intended to keep people from bumping their own threads. "I don't have enough critiques! Not enough people are paying attention to my brilliant work! They shouldn't be wasting their time on other people's stuff; they should be totally consumed by my genius!" BUMP. That's what we wanted to avoid. As I said above, I don't see a problem with someone else bumping a long-dormant Workshop thread. They may not have been a member yet when the thread was originally posted, but they have something of interest to say about it. I say, let 'em.
Yeah. I just wondered how the rule affects the OP here ...who wants to get a change to one of her old threads discussed, and will be bumping it herself. Is that going to cause Imaginarily any bother? I can't see that it would, if she's made major changes. In fact, it would make sense. But the rule isn't really clear. When is it okay to bump your own thread? The only written reference I was able to find was the one I posted above, from the Workshop FAQ section: Q: I posted a story for review and it is moving down the thread and about to disappear to the next page. What do I do? A: Refer to the above answer. Don’t bump your thread to get it back on top. That is against forums rules and will result in an infraction.
It seems to me that posting an actual edit (a substantial edit, rather than "I fixed that one misspelling!") isn't what the "don't bump" rule is about. It seems to be entirely in keeping with the purpose of the Review Room.
I interpret it to mean that you can bump your own thread if you've made major changes/revisions to the work. It is NOT okay to bump your own thread just to get more eyes on it, when you haven't done anything substantial to warrant the bump.
I'm with minstrel on this one. Bumping would be when you post to your thread for the sole purpose of making it get more attention, and that is against the rules. Actually posting a revised copy of your story in the hope of some new reviews is not bumping (unless you don't get any reviews so you do it repeatedly in hope of getting someones attention), and is therefore definitely inline with how the Workshop should be used.
There are bumps and there are bumps. In some way, me just saying thank you for reading, thank you for your suggestions. Is a bump. And that's just beeing polite! So as long as you in a relevant way address the people that has responded I feel it's not bumping. Rewriting to fix things that has been pointed out would be relevant. But of course I made the misstake to write breast rather than chest (same word in swedish) This is not relevant to repost. I have added 1500 words to a 1500 words short story after suggestion. It took me a week before I posted that. Of course everyone defines relevant differently. I can't say I have seen many sinners here breaking the meaning of the rule.
Yeah, it's one of those rules that's not hard and fast ...as what @GB reader just pointed out. Thanking somebody for a review will 'bump' your piece up the list—and yet it's the courteous thing to do. However, if you do that right after somebody critiques you, I don't see a problem. As long as you don't thank the same person for the same critique once per week for the next 6 months!
Think of 'bumping' as different from 'replying'. A reply adds to the thread and continues the discussion. A bump doesn't add to the thread but merely pushes it to the top of the list. So a new version of Imaginarily's critique piece is a reply. If she resurrected her thread with a post saying "Any more critiques?" that would be a bump.
How about, if you like a critique of someone else's work, you contact them privately and ask for a review of your neglected older work? Then they would bump it, if they thought it had merit. See, I'm new and I see work that's been sitting around with hardly any responses, while there is nothing recent in a genre that interests me. If someone pointed to me a piece of children's fiction or an essay needing review, that would be mutually beneficial, without cheating.
I haven't read all the replies so this might already have been said. But... I find it quite annoying when old critique threads get bumped. I wouldn't reply to an old critique thread myself, as I would assume that the author has moved on and no longer wants critique on that passage. So it's particularly annoying when somebody decides to dredge up a load of old critique threads and add their opinion, thus bumping a load of old threads to the top and making it more difficult to find what is most recent. I personally feel that critique threads should be automatically locked if they haven't received a response in over a month.
I understand. But one month seems arbitrarily and unnecessarily, short - unless there is a pile of new work waiting for a chance to be read. In the genres I mentioned, there is nothing less than three months old, and in one case, even the entry at the very top is older than that. By such a rule, those threads would be empty.
But a large part of the purpose of critique is for the critic and the audience to learn from them, not just the author. So these pieces would serve a large part of their purpose if they were posted and the author ran away forever.
I second this. On a few other sites I am on, the members can request a mod to lock their thread once they are happy with the amount of critique they've received. This also makes me cringe, and I am often subject to people critiquing my critique. While not a rule on this site, I often don't reply to such things, or I'll explain to them that a workshop thread is not the appropriate venue to argue about such things, and recommend they start a separate thread and tag me to continue our conversation. (Only one member has ever taken me up on the offer.)
one thing that might be forgotten is that new members must critique to post for a critique. crit away and laugh when op gets mad, or whatever else happens.
I haven't seen this - so far, anyway. I have seen authors clarifying what a critic questioned, or explaining what a critic didn't understand. I think a certain amount of discussion is appropriate, particularly as uninvolved third+ parties may be reading it and perhaps recognizing similar ambiguity in their own work that they can repair before posting it.
That's the thing; an archive for reference for 1...and it could be more than that. By actually critiquing a submission (however old + whether the original poster's long departed or not), it won't be an exercise in futility. No—doing so, by way of close scrutiny, works to enrich the self too. And for that, I'm one for keeping old posts available for resurrection by anyone who cares to contribute.
Regarding critiquing old threads: Firstly, see my (and @minstrel's) replies earlier in the thread. And as others have said giving a critique can be more beneficial to the critic than to the member receiving the critique. Regarding "critique the critiquer": As is stated in the FAQ debates do not belong in the Workshop. If someone wants to argue with another's critique it should be done in a PM ("Conversation") or in another part of the forum. Finally, regarding @Oxymaroon's original question (see quote below): I would be fine with asking other members to give you a critique for a piece of yours if you like that member's critiquing style. However, remember that no one is ever forced to give critiques (unless if they want to post their own writing) so if the member you ask declines then you have to respect that. Also, note that there is a difference between asking another member to help you out once in a blue moon, and asking every member you can find to critique your every piece (or trying to draw attention to your threads via PMs because you want more critiques). This is why questions like these are often hard to answer: things like this are so easily abused.
