My point is that Lin is disparaging any opinions from those who have not published, but ignoring a response from a published writer. I can respect his point about opinions stated by those of us who have not published, even when he says it so dismissively. But when he chooses not to notice a response from someone with publishing experience, that needs to be pointed out. I welcome being corrected by someone who has more experience. However, ALL discussions on the forum must be conducted respectfully.
That doesn't sound very respectful to me. It sounds like trying to imply dishonesty to somebody for disagreeing. By inserting "ethics" into a discussion where they had been raised, nor applied. Tell you what. Say and do as you please.
It is a straightforward question. Questions on ethics and honesty are not always comfortable ones. That doesn't make it disrespectful. Stating views expressed by members who disagree as comparable to a kindergarten mentality. That doesn't sound very respectful to me. Terry
Well, then maybe you can explain why ethics and honesty suddenly came into the question of whether or not a publisher will refuse work that's been workshopped. It's not a question of discomfort. It's a question of raising something that had nothing to do with the question, and thus implying dishonest or unethical behavior out of the clear blue sky. I have a better idea, though. Why dont we just knock this off?
Ethics and honesty enters into the question of whether it is ok if it's posted on a forum but the search engines cannot see it. Whether it turns up in a Google search equates to whether the author "gets caught". So it really isn't out of the blue at all.
I don't see how it came out of the clear blue sky. The post that initiated the topic: Part of one of my replies in this topic: A section of a later comment in the string: I agree. Varying opinions on the topic have been presented. While I don't necessarily agree with every the observations, comments, and assertions that've been posted, I respect the individual points of view on the issue put forth. Those who come across this topic can read the discussion and come to their own conclusion, or at least have a few thoughts on the topic to consider. Time to "knock this off". Terry
If we assume that your advice is good then all of those who want to have their work taken seriously had better stop posting it on the forums, right?
If you want to know, I believe that someone who posts an entire work (not an excerpt or beginning scene for example), on an open forum (or blog, or website) that requires no password to view (thus open to reading) by anyone on the internet, even if they posted it for review and comments and suggestions (workshopping), then the first electronic rights have been utilized. There are always reprint rights to be sold. There are other forums that have passwords to enter (often based on avoiding spambots) and then have passwords to get to specific review sites or crit groups. Some writers feel that that second password is necessary, for a variety of reasons. That is the purpose of the "members only viewing" statement. Others may feel that if an item cannot be searched for via google or yahoo by name or key phrases, that is good enough for them. It isn't for me, but it is something that might be of consideration to other writers. But back to your original statement or question, Baron: If that's what you've decided based upon the discussion in this string, then stop/don't post in the review area. Seriously. It's for each writer to decide. Terry
If by "taken seriously", you mean "accepted for publication", then you do need to consider the possibility that you will not be able to negotiate for first publication rights. Not all writing is intended for publication for a profit. Should we take writing less seriously because the author has no plans to submit the work to a publisher? Many of the members of this and other writing forums are still developing their craft. Of those, some percentage will either decide writing for publication is too much work, or that they don't have something that will fit into the market niches served by publishers. Some only write for their own pleasure, and wish nothing to do with the business of writing. So work posted while developing your writing style, or work you have no intention of submitting to a publisher, this can be posted. And it will be taken seriously. But those who plan to submit their work for publication must recognize that there are business considerations, and posting for widespread review prior to submissiom can have consequences on the marketability of the work.
that is the bottom line here, imo... where honesty and integrity come in is when/if the writer who has posted a complete work or significant portion of one anywhere on the web is asked by an agent or publisher whether or not the work has been 'published' in any form and says 'no'... that would then be dishonest to some degree and would demontrate a lack of integrity... whether or not s/he is 'caught' in the lie, by the post having been cached and noticed by the person asking is moot... the point is that it would be a lie, not that it could be proven...
I would, for reasons stated in ealier posts, say that this is really only a significant issue with novels. Personally I hever never published more than a brief extract from a novel on the internet, and would not do so. Poetry and short stories are another issue because the fact that a poem or short story may have already been published in a magazine or whatever does not exclude those works from being a part of published collections.
...for books, but not if you want to get that poem/story published in a magazine... in the latter case, cog's comments still hold true...
Di you read what I posted? You are implying not getting published in a magazine because it will infringe first rghts on getting published in a magazine. Do you read posts before you respond? I stated quite clearly that a short story published in a magazine will not influence the first rights issue over a collection published in a book.
Correct, it would not exclude an author to sell a previously published work as a reprint. The short story collections (single author and multiple author) I have on my bookshelves, such as those by Orson Scott Card's, are made up of reprints of stories. Single author story collections can contain all new (unpublished) stories, all reprinted stories, or a combination. The same with anthologies made up of stories from several or more authors. It all depends on the what individual publishers of such collections are seeking. Having used first publication rights (the various typs of first publication rights would be appropriate for another topic) does not exclude an author from seeking to publish the same work as a reprint. It may limit some of the available markets--those not seeking reprints, or the reimbursement level as some publishers pay less. There is nothing wrong for an author to seek and find new paying markets for works they've sold previously. I have. It's a common practice. A successfully published story can do better (earn more money and reach a greater audience) as a reprint, depending on the market that accepts it (including magazines, ezines, print anthologies, etc.). And a story can be resold as many times as the author can find someone willing to buy/publish it as a reprint. Terry
no need to get so nasty, baron... i was merely emphasizing the point i made for others, not discounting what you said...
