Not a bad idea, Iris, but I think it might be more productive to break the review work down by genre.
Good luck to this group. I've hovered over the idea of asking to join up, then decided not to. One, because I would want total control over what I decide to critique. And two, because I don't want to commit myself to a particular number of critiques. I find that the more critiques and beta-reads that I do, the less focus I bring to my own writing. In fact, my own writing goes right off track when I'm spending a lot of time dealing with other people's writing issues. While I'm happy to give my time, because I've had so many great people give ME feedback over the years, I can feel rubber screeching at the thought of being frog-marched into critiques of pieces I have no real feeling for, or no real time for either. So ...I'll continue to do critiques, if that's okay—and I like your guidelines of what a good critique should include, and will try to follow them. But outwith the group, and at my own pace?
I like this as a compromise because I'm not in favor of assigning particular or individual threads as must-dos.
I like this idea. Perhaps everyone gets to choose certain genres in the short story section they want to do, additionally, they choose one/two other sections they would like to critique as @Mckk mentioned, like Poetry, FF, Novels, etc The number of reviewers needed for a genre/section would be determined based on activity. Non-Fiction for example sees about 1 story each month so only 1 reviewer is really needed to watch the section.
Now this might sound greedy but I was thinking about this, and it almost seems like the forum would be used as a service and not necessarily as a forum anymore to do this. So why would it be fair for new people to just drop in and post stuff to be critiqued and reviewed and not do the same for others? I think in order to kill more than one bird with one stone, why not have the reviewers section is a separate private area. Then have all the reviewers gain access to it and be labeled as reviewers. Finally anyone that wants to be able to post things in the various areas to be reviewed would pay $2.50 a month to be considered a "Supporter" and have access to the new area? Of course all the other "Supporters" would have access to the are as well.
This program does not remove the 2 critique per new posted item requisite in any way. That remains in place. The purpose of this is to improve focus on the Workshop and also the overall quality of critiques that are given.
I think I'll take the same tack as Jannert. As much as I would love to make the commitment, I can't with a clear conscience. My Beeper ups and downs make it nigh on impossible to realistically fulfill the criteria. I have enough problems writing for myself, but I'll continue to do what I can whenever I'm able.
If you are only looking for 2 'good' critiques a week, I'm sure I could do that for two poems per week. Should there also be some kind of rule that once a piece has been critiqued by say, two official reviewers, that the other reviewers should try to do a piece that hasn't been reviewed yet, or has less than one review?
Wrey, I could give one or two critiques a week no problem. PM me and let me know what's happening. Thanks.
Honestly, at this point, I might be able to do one a month realistically. My schedule is so cramped right now.
hope i'm not being redundant in asking these questions, but if i am, it would help me to see the answers all in one place, so i hope i'll be forgiven and be 'humored'... have you established the 'rules 'n regs' the 'official reviewers' will be expected to follow? if so, will you please list them here? if they're not firmly fixed yet, please list what criteria are being considered... how will the 'reviewer' applicants be 'vetted'? who will be doing the vetting?
Nope. Not as of yet. That's the reason for this discussion. Firstly to gage interest, thus "worthwhileness" of carrying forward, and then secondly to take those individuals who are interested and through/with them set those rules and regs. I believe in the start before you're ready mindset. Too much committee is the guillotine to many a good idea. Right now the criteria is a willingness to participate and recognizable history with the forum. I'm less interested in exclusionary vetting of people than in affording them an opportunity to grow their skills as critics, thus their skills as writers , through the application of a concerted, committed team effort. The idea that critiquing work is the more fruitful path to success is something to which I give more than lip service. I know it to be a truth. ETA: Though vetting is not the verb I would use, overseeing the program will be I myself, in answer to the last question.
Great! Tell me how to start or what to do next, or please direct me to the thread explaining it (she asked sheepishly.)
I'd like to take a shot at it. My main reason is simply to get multiple perspectives on the writing process. I think it would be mutually beneficial, and I have plenty of free time for the time being. Would probably be able to critique a decent number of stories per month.
Hi @Oliver Domhan, welcome to the forum. You don't need permission or a 'reviewer' title to start giving critiques. Just head on over to the workshop and dig in. "Reviewer - Write consistent, frequent, quality reviews in the Writing Workshop."
Ginger is correct. There's not much activity in this project at the moment because critiques are are healthy and flowing the workshop at the moment. I carried the banner for this idea at a time when this was not the case.
I'm a multi genre kind of writer. For the most part I only really have writing experience in Fantasy, Science Fiction, Action/Romance, Psychological/Thriller, Horror and Gore. I've done poetry back in school, starting in the fifth grade going straight up through to ninth. I've even had a poem published in 2003 and 2007. So I'd love to contribute!