|
Andrew A
|
|
|
|
I agree with Youngun—there’s a first—there are far too many members for the 'I’ll scratch yours if you scratch mine' approach to work. Don’t forget, there are many levels of ability on YWO and what appears to be substandard to an experienced writer, may well seem brilliant to someone just starting out. And then there are those—long term members amongst them—who simply go through the motions to get the reading credit – wonderful, well-written, captured my attention, want to read further blah, blah, blah.
I don’t take much notice of scores. The best review I’ve ever received gave me the lowest score I’ve ever had???
|
|
notleyab
|
|
|
|
Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I don’t take much notice of scores. The best review I’ve ever received gave me the lowest score I’ve ever had??? That's very true AA. But many pple knock the scores without reading the instructions. Forgetting all abt the TT, if the scores follow the set guidelines they shd give a clear picture of where a story needs to be improved or not. Giving examples to go with them is obviously that much more useful. If somebody gives loads of 5s to a piece that doesn't warrant them, at least you know not to rely on that particular reviewer's judgement.
|
|
Andrew A
|
|
|
|
Quote: notleyab, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:22Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I don’t take much notice of scores. The best review I’ve ever received gave me the lowest score I’ve ever had??? That's very true AA. But many pple knock the scores without reading the instructions. Forgetting all abt the TT, if the scores follow the set guidelines they shd give a clear picture of where a story needs to be improved or not. Giving examples to go with them is obviously that much more useful. If somebody gives loads of 5s to a piece that doesn't warrant them, at least you know not to rely on that particular reviewer's judgement. Listen, everything I write warrants loads of fives! Maybe that's the problem, we all think we're better than we are. I tend to go by the comments. Everyone has a different view but if several people say the same thing, then there's something in it – for good or bad. I tend to see what I want to see in my own work, so I love those reviewers who spot all the little errors I miss when proofreading.
|
|
dancingsue
|
|
|
|
Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I agree with Youngun—there’s a first—there are far too many members for the 'I’ll scratch yours if you scratch mine' approach to work. Don’t forget, there are many levels of ability on YWO and what appears to be substandard to an experienced writer, may well seem brilliant to someone just starting out. And then there are those—long term members amongst them—who simply go through the motions to get the reading credit – wonderful, well-written, captured my attention, want to read further blah, blah, blah. There are some good points here. I'm afraid I will never be a member of the ISYIYSM squad because I will review honestly and as constructively as I can wherever the piece sits in the charts. I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members. I do remember being more impressed by Top Ten work four years ago and it's not the work that's changed, it's my expectations. That's not to say there isn't excellent writing in the top ten - there is. And lower down the charts too. Sometimes not being 'mainstream' holds quality pieces back. I suspect that some of the high-markers are influenced by the position in the charts and mark accordingly, probably because they haven't yet found their feet as reviewers and don't like (or feel qualified) to disagree. On the other hand, some members are resentful of the position and mark low. So it all balances out.
This post was last edited by dancingsue, 06 Jul 2012, 12:06
the long and the short of it
|
|
Majordave
|
|
|
|
Quote: notleyab, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 09:46Quote: willow55, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 02:12I used to like Notley’s idea of transparency in scoring but I think it has its down side. When someone has given a gushing review of something mediocre, ending with the words ‘I have scored you all fives’ (or similar), it’s not hard to imagine that the compliment will be returned at some point, particularly if emails are exchanged and friendships formed. I don't see that as a 'fault' of putting in the scores; more an encouragement to do so. If someone has given them all 5s, they are probably more likely to reciprocate, whether it's been highlighted for other people on the site to see or not. Putting in the scores is being transparent - you can actually see what marks people have given each other. Plus, they 'should' show a clear appraisal of how each category was rated, from Excellent 5 thru to Poor 1. Just how many pieces on YWO rate 8 fives - that is, Excellent in every single category? As young'un points out, how many wd rate that way for even a recognized writer? Putting it simply, the more who do put their scores in reviews, the more relevant they will become. And open the question as to what those who don't put in their scores have to hide... I forget sometimes. Perhaps the scores should be automatically recorded on the bottom of the review or on the ratings page so you know who gave you what. I don't much care these days, but I used to.
-------------------------------------------- Know not what you know and know nothing in return. (Confuseus)
|
|
Majordave
|
|
|
|
Quote: dancingsue, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 11:16Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I agree with Youngun—there’s a first—there are far too many members for the 'I’ll scratch yours if you scratch mine' approach to work. Don’t forget, there are many levels of ability on YWO and what appears to be substandard to an experienced writer, may well seem brilliant to someone just starting out. And then there are those—long term members amongst them—who simply go through the motions to get the reading credit – wonderful, well-written, captured my attention, want to read further blah, blah, blah. There are some good points here. I'm afraid I will never be a member of the ISYIYSM squad because I will review honestly and as constructively as I can wherever the piece sits in the charts. I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members. I do remember being more impressed by Top Ten work four years ago and it's not the work that's changed, it's my expectations. That's not to say there isn't excellent writing in the top ten - there is. And lower down the charts too. Sometimes not being 'mainstream' holds quality pieces back. I suspect that some of the high-markers are influenced by the position in the charts and mark accordingly, probably because they haven't yet found their feet as reviewers and don't like (or feel qualified) to disagree. On the other hand, some members are resentful of the position and mark low. So it all balances out. "I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members." There's a piece in the TT that I have not reviewed and that shall obviously remain nameless, of which I have read the first dozen or so paragraphs. It has more flaws than Rita Webb's arse. I spotted typos, poor punctuation and a POV jump. I found it hard to follow at times and gave up. I don't want to get it as an assignment, because I will certainly knock it down a few places. That's unless it's tidied up a good deal by then. I've read all the other crits and only one read it the same as me. I suppose, it just goes to show that no matter how good a piece appears to most, it takes just one bad review to knock the wind out of the author's sails. I hope its not mine.
This post was last edited by Majordave, 06 Jul 2012, 13:14
-------------------------------------------- Know not what you know and know nothing in return. (Confuseus)
|
|
dancingsue
|
|
|
|
Quote: Majordave, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:13[I suppose, it just goes to show that no matter how good a piece appears to most, it takes just one bad review to knock the wind out of the author's sails. I hope its not mine. It's not about knocking the writer back, though, is it? I asked someone whose opinion I respect to read the story I described, thinking the fault might be mine, in which case I wouldn't have reviewed it. She said exactly what I thought and felt my suggestions might help strengthen the piece (which is what it's really about) so I went ahead and gave a very full review. I didn't get a 'thank you', needless to say.
the long and the short of it
|
|
Andrew A
|
|
|
|
Quote: Majordave, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:13Quote: dancingsue, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 11:16Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I agree with Youngun—there’s a first—there are far too many members for the 'I’ll scratch yours if you scratch mine' approach to work. Don’t forget, there are many levels of ability on YWO and what appears to be substandard to an experienced writer, may well seem brilliant to someone just starting out. And then there are those—long term members amongst them—who simply go through the motions to get the reading credit – wonderful, well-written, captured my attention, want to read further blah, blah, blah. There are some good points here. I'm afraid I will never be a member of the ISYIYSM squad because I will review honestly and as constructively as I can wherever the piece sits in the charts. I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members. I do remember being more impressed by Top Ten work four years ago and it's not the work that's changed, it's my expectations. That's not to say there isn't excellent writing in the top ten - there is. And lower down the charts too. Sometimes not being 'mainstream' holds quality pieces back. I suspect that some of the high-markers are influenced by the position in the charts and mark accordingly, probably because they haven't yet found their feet as reviewers and don't like (or feel qualified) to disagree. On the other hand, some members are resentful of the position and mark low. So it all balances out. "I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members." There's a piece in the TT that I have not reviewed and that shall obviously remain nameless, of which I have read the first dozen or so paragraphs. It has more flaws than Rita Webb's arse. I spotted typos, poor punctuation and a POV jump. I found it hard to follow at times and gave up. I don't want to get it as an assignment, because I will certainly knock it down a few places. That's unless it's tidied up a good deal by then. I've read all the other crits and only one read it the same as me. I suppose, it just goes to show that no matter how good a piece appears to most, it takes just one bad review to knock the wind out of the author's sails. I hope its not mine. Not so Majordave, just because a piece is TT doesn’t mean it can’t be improved. If the author is serious about their work, they should thank anyone who points out their literary failings before they send their work to agents who will far tougher than YWO members are.
|
|
Majordave
|
|
|
|
Quote: dancingsue, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:21Quote: Majordave, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:13[I suppose, it just goes to show that no matter how good a piece appears to most, it takes just one bad review to knock the wind out of the author's sails. I hope its not mine. It's not about knocking the writer back, though, is it? I asked someone whose opinion I respect to read the story I described, thinking the fault might be mine, in which case I wouldn't have reviewed it. She said exactly what I thought and felt my suggestions might help strengthen the piece (which is what it's really about) so I went ahead and gave a very full review. I didn't get a 'thank you', needless to say. Not getting a thank you is par for the couse these days, Sue, unless you wrap it up in fives (some members accepted, of course). Its getting slated on the TYforum for seemingly being the only person not like it, that would put me off. Although, if they did slate me, I would respond with my reason for the crit, unlike many.
-------------------------------------------- Know not what you know and know nothing in return. (Confuseus)
|
|
Majordave
|
|
|
|
Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:25Quote: Majordave, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 13:13Quote: dancingsue, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 11:16Quote: Andrew A, Friday, 6 Jul 2012 10:04I agree with Youngun—there’s a first—there are far too many members for the 'I’ll scratch yours if you scratch mine' approach to work. Don’t forget, there are many levels of ability on YWO and what appears to be substandard to an experienced writer, may well seem brilliant to someone just starting out. And then there are those—long term members amongst them—who simply go through the motions to get the reading credit – wonderful, well-written, captured my attention, want to read further blah, blah, blah. There are some good points here. I'm afraid I will never be a member of the ISYIYSM squad because I will review honestly and as constructively as I can wherever the piece sits in the charts. I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members. I do remember being more impressed by Top Ten work four years ago and it's not the work that's changed, it's my expectations. That's not to say there isn't excellent writing in the top ten - there is. And lower down the charts too. Sometimes not being 'mainstream' holds quality pieces back. I suspect that some of the high-markers are influenced by the position in the charts and mark accordingly, probably because they haven't yet found their feet as reviewers and don't like (or feel qualified) to disagree. On the other hand, some members are resentful of the position and mark low. So it all balances out. "I recently reviewed a TT piece I thought had a lot of flaws and was amazed by the gushings of other members." There's a piece in the TT that I have not reviewed and that shall obviously remain nameless, of which I have read the first dozen or so paragraphs. It has more flaws than Rita Webb's arse. I spotted typos, poor punctuation and a POV jump. I found it hard to follow at times and gave up. I don't want to get it as an assignment, because I will certainly knock it down a few places. That's unless it's tidied up a good deal by then. I've read all the other crits and only one read it the same as me. I suppose, it just goes to show that no matter how good a piece appears to most, it takes just one bad review to knock the wind out of the author's sails. I hope its not mine. Not so Majordave, just because a piece is TT doesn’t mean it can’t be improved. If the author is serious about their work, they should thank anyone who points out their literary failings before they send their work to agents who will far tougher than YWO members are. Agreed, Andrew. Watch this space. It could be well out of the TT in any case by the time I get it. Or not.
-------------------------------------------- Know not what you know and know nothing in return. (Confuseus)
|
|
Is it odd how some stories have surprisingly good reviews?
06 Jul 2012, 10:04
