As someone who has beta-read and has been beta-read for, I know how valuable the process can be. Sometimes it's the most critical readers who will point out exactly what's missing in your story, so you can correct the problem and make it better. But occasionally, it just doesn't work. So since I'm feeling a little perverse today, I propose starting this thread. I'll go first. You know you've got the wrong beta reader when . . . she starts telling you what your characters would and wouldn't do-- on the very first page. EDIT: In all fairness, it was the very first scene. Still.
Can we take this both directions? You know you aren't the right beta reader for an author when you tell them it's not ready (with your reasons of course) for a beta read and they dismiss you and go find another reader.
You know you've got the wrong beta reader when you tell them what the book is about and they respond with "really?"
Really? No, but in all seriousness, you know you have the wrong beta reader when they tell you not to accurately represent a perspective because it offends their own.
... all he tells you is it's 'fine' and you should start submitting it. The same draft elicited pages and pages of comments, corrections and suggestions from our very own @Tenderiser who gave me so much valuable feedback, I'm putting her in for an award... as soon as they invent one.
You know you've got the wrong beta reader when they tell you romance has no place in a book, violence has no place in a book, magic has no place in a book, any religion save Christianity has no place in a book, and women cannot be main characters. And if the only stories you will look kindly on are man against nature, saved by the redeeming power of prayer, you should not offer yourself as a beta reader for any other genera!
... when they tell you it's good, and when you ask them to elaborate, they tell you it's really good! They may be a fan, but they are not giving useful feedback.
You know you've got the wrong beta-reader when they give criticisms on characters they can't recall the names of.
This sounds like personal experience. Do tell. I've only had church people do that when they try and read what I'm writing over my shoulder. Never had that happen in any official setting. Oh, no, wait, in my high-school OYAN class a ton of kids did that, but it wasn't like they asked to read my stuff, they had to as peer-review was part of the program. I will admit to intentionally putting provocative stuff in what I had read aloud in class just to bug them though. Poor kids thought I was a serial killer for the rest of the year. lol. @Brindy those people are the worst and most common in my opinion. The rest you can mock without it being deemed rude. Then it's just like, ok, thx for wasting my time, bye. @Inks what did you do, write the story on pressed oak pollen? You know you have the wrong beta reader when they skim read half a paragraph and then tell you how your fictional government is a liberal cesspool that is stupid and would never work in real life and then goes off on a tangent about how the conservative party is way better because on this fictional world college is free and the government employs people when they're in-between jobs. (at minimum wage manufacturing stuff in factories for companies the government owns, runs, staffs and gets all the profit from, btw.) Never mind that in the next paragraph it describes how everyone open carries, civilians shooting criminals is legal and public executions are a thing.
Could be a good sign - it's that exciting. You know you have the wrong beta reader when they're trying to get you to sound more like their preferred choice of read.
I'm not going to derail this thread, but if you are interested there are several threads floating around which detail the joyous experiences I've had with beta readers and critique groups alike.
@Brindy those people are the worst and most common in my opinion. The rest you can mock without it being deemed rude. Then it's just like, ok, thx for wasting my time, bye. I have got the other extreme, one prints the whole manuscript off and goes through with different coloured highlighters to indicate, the brilliant, the ok and the awful..., can be a bit hard to see, but really useful. She's one I'll hang on to!
YKYGTWBRW - It's a relative that you know would never want to insult you. (I'm looking for insults dammit! Argue with me! Tell me where I'm wrong!)
I was going to say that the worst beta reader is one who says everything is fine, but on second thoughts I think the worst is one determined not to like anything. At least the "OMG this is great!!!1" readers give you an ego boost. The ones who just want to tear authors down don't even do that. Thankfully I don't think they're common. I'm always a little perplexed when people talk about "bad" beta readers overlaying their biases onto a manuscript. I saw an advice article today that says beta readers should try to understand the author's "vision" for a book and only give feedback that helps the author achieve their vision. That's the LAST thing I want beta readers to do for me! My idea of a beta reader is someone who pretends to be reading the book for pleasure and gives you their impressions, complete with all their biases and likes and dislikes. It's then up to me as the author to filter their feedback and decide what to take and what not to take. I don't want my betas modifying their feedback for me. I want their honest opinions. I want to know if everyone hates my character because she's whiny, even if my vision of her is a whiny person. ANYWAY. I hope that wasn't off-topic even if it didn't answer the OP... My idea of the wrong beta reader is: Someone who'd never buy my book because they hate romance or hate one of the tropes I used or whatever. I've tried this several times with beta readers and their feedback was useless. BUT I do like having beta readers who don't hate romance but don't love it either, as well as romance lovers. Someone who focuses primarily on line editing (SPAG, phrasing). That's the least useful feedback for me. I want their thoughts and impressions and to know when they laughed and when they were annoyed. I can fix typos myself but I can never get a first impression of my own characters. I'd rather have a three-paragraph email of high-level feedback than a manuscript with 2,000 track changes. Someone who's only doing it because they want me to do it for them. I don't like tit-for-tat beta-ing for many reasons. Apparently I'm a tough beta reader (I don't mean to be) so the "real" state of your MS is probably somewhere in the middle of those two extremes!
This is a great topic! You know you've got the wrong beta reader when the first things they say is, "I don't usually read this genre."
I've had friends who were phenomenal beta readers and gave great critique. But then again, I majored in film, not english or journalism. We considered it a joy to get to rip apart someone else's work with equal parts savagery and honesty.
See, I'm a bit opposite on these two points. I don't get an ego boost from someone telling me it's good unless I know them as a writer. If I think they're talented and I've read their stuff before and was impressed, I get an ego boost. If it's someone who tells me it's great but I know their works aren't to my standards, then I'd be disappointed as I expect harsher criticisms from them (after all, beta-ing is a learning tool for both participants!) I enjoy the quid-pro-quo beta readings especially since we're all in the same boat and need help and encouragement. It'd be a bit rude to expect help but not offer it in kind. But that just means I'm more selective about who can read my stuff because there is little to be gained from beta-ing with someone who isn't at your "level" (for lack of a better term) I also think it's a great way to actually get a bit of a professional relationship with another writer.
