>>6961> Unsolicited reviews were another of the things the TWE was cited with having done wrong.
It's really the wording that's bothersome. While I understand why it is written that way, you also have to understand how I got to that interpretation. Whether or not a review is official or solicited is irrelevant. If someone is being nasty, that's not okay.
I think you're taking the criticism against TWE too heavily and it's becoming unnecessary baggage for WRITE. You have 3 rules that are only trying to ensure that nobody thinks this is TWE 2.0.
Your rules should instead emphasise that, as a reviewer, your job is to help the author. Too often writers critiquing other writers take the opportunity to flour their own ego at the cost of actually being helpful, and I think that was the primary issue with TWE. People were in it for the fun of it. Unsolicited reviews weren't the problem so much as those reviews being unnecessarily scathing and unhelpful.
That said, I would still suggesting keeping only to solicited reviews, if only to save yourselves the trouble of giving feedback to someone who doesn't want any. But this isn't so much a rule as it is a smart way of doing things in the reviewing world.
You can avoid being TWE 2.0 by simply leading by example. People are awfully conformant and act wildly differently depending on their environment. If people don't understand good reviewer ethics and enter your environment, then they find themselves in the wrong place and either leave or change themselves to suit the environment.
Actually banning people or using fixed rules should only be a last resort to enforcing these kinds of guidelines. For the most part, the community can enforce etiquette themselves through the use of social powers: "Wow, you're an arsehole, Greg. Why would you go and do that…" With the same sentiment expressed by everyone in the community, Greg is going to either conform or leave.
If instead Greg gets a bunch of snickers from their colleagues about how awful that story he just trashed is, he's going to think what he did is okay. I've witnessed this a few times with the TG, and each time it only took me standing up and saying, "Hey, you guys are being arseholes," to get the situation resolved.
> I can understand the perspective, but hell, we /like/ being around. All of the founders went through groups they cared about falling through, and it just sucks. If I'm going to be putting so many of my eggs in a basket, I'd prefer the basket to be shock-proof.
I seriously, seriously doubt that your group is going to go anywhere, short of me entirely miscalculating how toxic Fimfiction's environment is.
> I don't know, really. I can only speak for myself, and in my case, it's only because I've never considered the possibility. Why should it have to be anything more? It certainly wouldn't be any sort of group policy or somesuch.
> It wouldn't sit too well with me, making public the failings that some of the applicants have had.
Couldn't you just blur out the names? Make a thread on your group called "Filed Applications" and each post is something along the lines of:
> ID: 1> Status: Rejected> Reason: …
It's not that I don't trust you. It's that we may be on different pages when it comes to what constitutes a "good" reviewer.
> [T]hey're outright offering false advice on mechanics.
I find that there's a necessary distinction between "critique" and "editing". The way I see it, you want the former for your 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and n
th draft, and the latter only for your last. There's no point editing something if it may well get rewritten anyway.
I bring this up because mechanics are only important for editing. While you could disqualify someone from being an editor based on these criteria, you can't really say that their critique would be unhelpful.
> I'm willing to give [IRC] a try, and I'd imagine others would be as well.
The channel is #fic on irc.canternet.org. If you aren't familiar with IRC clients, I'd suggest you use Mibbit (http://chat.mibbit.com
). Click on the "server" button and put "irc.canternet.org" in the server field, "#fic" in the channel field, and your nickname in the nick field.
This post was edited by its author on .