Currently as most of you will know the workshop requires two constructive crits given for every one asked (originally it used to require 14 days membership and 20 posts too but we relaxed that a couple of years back to try to make it more accessible) We're noticing a couple of things, one that we get a lot of posters who want to post their work, find they aren't allowed to and never come back. While we don't want to fill the workshop with people who are all take and no give, the other option exists that people might grow into decent members of the community if they weren't met with 'no' at the start. The other related thing we notice is that a lot of the time when new people do give crit it isn't exactly constructive, which then leads to more negative engagement as we try and encourage them to engage properly. We've been chatting ideas around in the staff room for as while, and we're at the point where we'd like some member input. feel free to also suggest other ideas, but do remember that we are running on XF1 here, so there's a lot of nice to do things that we just can't implement the options we've talked about include 1) Reduce the crit requirements from 2-1 to 1-1, hopefully making things more accessible. 2) Allow people to post one piece in the workshop before the crit requirements kick in. 3) Remove the requirement for crit to be 'constructive' and not attempt to police the quality of crit (although AI would still be against the rules). 4) Make the crit requirement much looser only dealing with egregious offenders who are all take and no give at mod team discretion. 5) Remove the requirement to give crit entirely - makes it much more accessible but runs the risk of filling the workshop with drive by posts. the poll will run for 14 days, if other good ideas surface in that time i will add them on
I'm thinking some people get embarrassed because they stumbled so bad so publicly, right off the bat, and they just don't want to show their faces again. Any chance there could be a popup when somebody tries to post to the Workshop telling them about the 2-for-1 requirement? And maybe it could even show them how many credits they've earned? Or that would require Daniel to materialize on the human plane once again, and it hasn't been a blue moon yet?
1) Reduce the crit requirements from 2-1 to 1-1, hopefully making things more accessible. - This feels okay. I just posted a critique the other day for the first time and found it hard to find new-ish things. So, encouraging people to post is good. 2) Allow people to post one piece in the workshop before the crit requirements kick in. - I personally disagree. I think you should give before you take, because people will post and run without ever critiquing another work. 3) Remove the requirement for crit to be 'constructive' and not attempt to police the quality of crit (although AI would still be against the rules). - I don't like this. I think that critique should always be constructive. Because writers are usually very nervous about sharing their work. We want some nice feedback, but also some pointers. I feel the rules on quality make it fair so people's works aren't just trashed by others. What I think we need to focus on more is the length of critique. Because sometimes, the author doesn't write enough for there to be much substance to comment on. I think we should require constructive feedback with a 1 paragraph minimum. Because it gives enough information, but also doesn't require going line by line. Different people will notice and comment on different things. If the constructive nature is removed, then I could see people being out-right flamed. 4) Make the crit requirement much looser only dealing with egregious offenders who are all take and no give at mod team discretion. - No. I think the requirements are fine as they are. I worry about people being flamed or ganged up on for writing something people don't like. And worse, feeling unprotected by the Mods. 5) Remove the requirement to give crit entirely - makes it much more accessible but runs the risk of filling the workshop with drive by posts. - Again, I think there should be a give and take requirement.
Yeah, my gut feeling is to keep the 2-for-1 and require it before posting their first piece. Otherwise everybody will post one story, never give any crit themselves, and then disappear. And we need to require constructive crit, otherwise this becomes a back-patting circle-jerk. It might feel nice to just get oohs and aahs and cookies, but we need the nutrition too. We already have the Showcase if they just want to post something and not have to worry about criticism. If you want to just praise something (I've done it a few times), give an extra crit, earn your points, and then you can shopwer somebody with rainbows and unicorn-poop all you want. But a huge part of this board is to teach how to do good crit, so you can do it on yourself as well as others. .
Agreed. But I do think that we need to find a away to add more new content to the forums. Because I just critiqued a 2020 Star Wars Fanfic the other day. Oops. So, it was really old. What if was just EASIER to get those to critiques. Like, we have the 'post your first three lines' thread. What if there was one for the 1st page? And it would count as 1 and you would gain access to the genre forms. Then, you had to give another critique in one of those and then you could post? Also, in the 'post your first page' critique, we would all get a feel of what it was LIKE to critique a work and it's okay to give pointers to people in that thread. Because maybe they left 1 line. Or accidentally got too mean? Like it's a step toward being able to properly critique. I know I am not good at doing that and I am sure others aren't either. So, if we had a beginner 'thread' to do it in to begin with, it could help raise the quality of critique.
The problem, I think, with the give-first policy with the forum in the state that it is at the moment, is that it has to be enforced by the mods. If a mod tells you what basically amounts to "you've screwed up" and locks your thread, you naturally feel aggrieved, no matter how polite the mod is. If it was automated, and you find you can't actually post it, that's different - that's "computer says no", and you feel slightly miffed, but not personally targeted.
Plus it isn't as embarrassing as having your beautiful first thread locked because of a rule you never saw. It's like coming in the door into a nice party where you hope to make a good impression, and immediately slipping on a banana peel and knocking over the umbrella stand. Many people would disappear after that and never show their face again.
This is why I don't have a reddit. All the forums are impossible to post on, because you always get your posts erased.
That removes the educational aspects that come from critiquing another's work. Reasonable but increases the number of drive bys. I think it would be better to provide instructions on how to write a critique. More discretion for the moderators is fine. Though I would suggest there are internal guidelines be put in place for that discretion. 5) completely opposed to this point.
We sort of do the first, theres an announcement bubble, but it only appears once and doesn't come back after its cancelled, we can't do the credit thing because the credit engine is broken That isn't going to happen no matter what - its a breach of the core site rules it used to be - but the guardian is broken and behind a door i can't access to fix - currently it requires two posts anywhere on the forum before you can post in the workshop we do that already, although admittedly it was written by Cogito about fifteen years ago and could do with an update https://www.writingforums.org/threads/constructive-critiques.20627/#post-408268
I voted for changing the requirement from 2 to 1 to 1 to 1. But I also want that in combination of the "everybody gets one" critique post. Yes, some new members will abuse that, and essentially dine and dash on the forum. However, consider that even in those unfortunate cases, this will still provide more opportunities for members who sincerely want to engage with the community to get more critiques under their belts. That, along with the previously mentioned bad vibes that new members might get when having their thread shut down right away, scaring them off, makes this the most sensible solution imo.
Scrib enforce strict requirements, over there you have to have a minimum of 5 karma points to post up to 5000 words. Every actionable critique of 125 words gets 1 karma point. For every word over 125 you get 0.001 karma points. If you write less than 125 you get 0 karma and if you write 125 but it's not actionable you get 0 points. If someone complain about a bad crit and mods agree you can lose points. (I've never lost any, only ever did good crits).
Hey all, n00b here looking to get involved I think that having the "one freebie" might be a good idea, but instead of just letting newer members post anywhere in the Workshop, could you make a dedicated "My First Submission" subforum, perhaps with a word count limit? That would serve a dual purpose of encouraging new members while also allowing critiquers to know that this is a first-timer who may or may not be back, so critique accordingly. For example, if there's someone I know well here I might spend a long time reading carefully and offering lots of (IMO) deep insight because I know that my efforts will be well-received and reciprocated at least in a "pay it forward" kind of way. OTOH, with someone coming in with their first post of "Here's my story, what do you think?" I'll still offer constructive advice but be less likely to spend a whole afternoon doing it. Yeah, I know I haven't spent a whole afternoon combined here in the past year or so, but you get the point. A word limit (a thousand words?), if the software will allow it (or a mod is willing to police it) will stop people from trying to post entire novels while still giving them the experience of being critiqued by the benign and infallible membership of this forum I think that removing the requirement that critiques be constructive would be a mistake. The "much looser crit requirement" is likewise a difficult idea; it leads to arguments over "But XYZ has the same number of crits and Workshop entries as I do, why can't I post my 33rd story of the week?" when XYZ (we don't have an XYZ, do we?) posts detailed crits of story weaknesses as opposed to ZYX (our complainant) who only chucks in a few comments about punctuation or spelling. I'm sure Moose remembers the discussions we had over one member who couldn't take in repeated warnings and the difficulties that caused the Team back in the day. Clear-cut rules that can be bent when needed are better for everyone concerned are better than elastic rules where the lines aren't clear. Just my 2yen.
I voted for new people being able to post once before 2 for 1 is enabled. Could do it as a trial for one year and if the implementation works poorly, just go back to status quo, maybe? New users need to be informed of the rules, however, and read them. So that they don't think they can post another for free after they've posted their first.
Please don't remove the crit requirement entirely. I think this will make things worse down the line. It might result in more stories to critique, but less critiques overall and definitely drive-by's that just want to get some quick praise. The .com workshop doesn't have a crit requirement and it's not doing as well activity wise. I posted a story there a while back and just barely managed to get two. It is true that those new to doing critiques will often not be very constructive. I think this is to be expected. Who does good critiques from the get-go? So, I propose that an entirely new resource is written that can help guide new members to write good and actually constructive critiques. I know there is one already, but it's really old, and I'm certain that we could do a lot better. Option 2 has potential if there is a good amount of workshop activity. If the new member gets loads of good and useful critiques, they'll be more encouraged to stay, keep posting new stories, and give more critiques as a result. If there's no activity and the results of the "sample" are one or two disappointing critiques, well, they won't be as compelled to stick around. All of that said, I think the lowering the requirement from 2 critiques to 1 is a good idea. That should provide more encouragement but still filter out newbies who aren't actually interested in any contributions. I'd also like to suggest that maybe we can reward active workshop users somehow? Maybe they get a special banner, which grants them perks of some kind. Not sure what, but there is potential for motivation there.
A reduction to 1:1 is definitely an option, but the requisite interactions are necessary to maintain a healthy balance within a community. The requirements work like floodgates on a dam and we all know what can happen with floods...
I see that I am in a minority, but I think the best way to increase traffic in the Workshop is by having no crit requirements. It will result in more posters, and with posting comes crits, and I do believe that most people, having received advice, will be moved to offer feedback to other stories in return. But first you have to draw them in. Once they see what it’s about, they will more likely participate.
I voted to allow one workshop post without prior critique. Coming on to a site like this for someone new to writing, who'd never shared their writing with anyone, as was my situation, it was quite daunting having to offer critique to another person's efforts (twice). At least posting one piece into the workshop and receiving feedback brings the newcomer more gently into the process, an opportunity to gauge what might be expected in critique and to get a sense of the culture within the forum. I agree with the idea mentioned above that critiquing others' work is of benefit to ones own output. For that reason, added to the overall benefit of a livelier workshop, I also voted to keep the 2:1 ratio as is. I'd suggest it's important to try to keep some standard of quality in the crits. Constructive isn't always favourable, though trashing someone's effort isn't generally of much use. It's a tough one to call. The workshop as is probably errs more on the side of politeness than damning, which is the better option, though sometimes a sharper edge could be more helpful. That comes down to comfort levels of different posters, I guess. It may be off point, but I don't think I'm the only one around here to sit up and take notice whenever any of the mods put out a critique. I understand people are busy with lives and loved ones and all that nonsense, but you people do know your stuff when ye get involved and it gives a particular energy to the workshop when it happens.
Having a fear of something is completely normal, how one addresses those feeling is just as important. It is part of the learning curve in any peer reviewed learning process. Don't want peer review, just unblemished trophy posting...maintain a blog. Stick it in an area designated a workshop, go in with a dose of basic reality and understand readers are offering their perspectives, not ordering an author to alter their work in any way. e.g. Variations on the gradients of the learning curve... No two writer ever starts in the same place, realistically there are some who have more innate skill than others. This is a given in any creative field. As an example, look at dog training. I have a fourteen month old Aussie, Marlowe, who I just enrolled in the Novice Obedience Rally class to get Mar used to working around other dogs, (he's great at ignoring people), as part of his service training. Mar has earned his CGC and passed his PA tests that we trained independently for, but Rally is new so we started at the beginning like everyone else. First time through the course and the instructor pulls Mar and I aside, I'm thinking I've done something horrendous... Nope. The instructor looked at our baseline skills and bumped Marlowe and I up to the next skill bracket because of the work we've already put in. Marlowe is still very much a puppy and has around eighteen more months of training and growing up to do before he reaches full service dog status, but it is clear from his behaviour and skill sets that he is much more than a basic ESA (emotional support animal), who are solely to offer comfort to their owners and are not task trained. As such ESAs do not have the same public access as trained service dogs. The difference in Marlowe's baseline stems not only from his breed type, but the daily work we do and have done since we got him last fall. An intermittent dabbler in writing looking for validation is going to have a very different mindset than someone who writes consistently and seeks out further enrichment.
