My DQ was because my document had my name on it.
Thanks.
If there's not, there should be a topic for such anecdotes.
"Submission nightmares," perhaps?
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
A dislike?
What the heck are dislikes for anyway?
Can someone point me towards the forum rules, I can't find them.
I'm pretty sure is not a requirement to like or dislike every one of someone's posts.
Particularly so many dislikes.
So why the dislike?
Don't like new topics?
Don't like other people talking about their experiences?
Don't like giving fellow writers some knowledge and for warning of possible issues?
Don't like my title suggestion?
Don't like the like button?
Trying to win a bet for most dislikes given?
Just being annoyin-g?
PS
From what I can see dislikes don't show up for the public, just that a person reacted, and only appear in mass on a person's account page.
So, unless I have that wrong, it's solely to try to make a person look bad and not to identify post preferences to the public.
I do get a notification of the like/dislike, from whom and the post it refers to (which completely vanish upon clicking or clearing notifications, by the way), but a message or comment wouldn't see a build up of dislikes on someone's account.
I can't see the benefit of spamming someone's account with dislikes?
Feel free to explain.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
As if it hasn’t been pointed out to you many, many times. No one needs to justify themselves at this point.
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
So why the dislike?
Apologies, I did not mean to dislike this post. I misclicked.
What I thoroughly disliked was this incredibly rude post to an incredibly talented writer who made a simple and irritatingly-easy clerical error:
DQ?
"You had one job!"
But you are right, I should have called you out and explained immediately rather than just hitting dislike.
And there is no benefit to spamming an account with dislikes. Every individual dislike you've received from me has been earned on its own merits. As have the likes. And dislikes serve a purpose: when someone appears to be trolling, another user can check their like/dislike ratio on their profile. It makes it incredibly apparent who is well meaning (even if you disagree with them) and who is deliberately being contrary.
VOL 40 2nd Quarter: Third Place ("Ashes to Ashes, Blood to Carbonfiber")
Past submissions: R - HM - HM - HM - HM - HM - SHM - SHM
www.jd-writes.com
Kindle Vella - Ashes to Ashes, Earth to Kaybee
And dislikes serve a purpose: when someone appears to be trolling, another user can check their like/dislike ratio on their profile. It makes it incredibly apparent who is well meaning (even if you disagree with them) and who is deliberately being contrary.
Oh man! I didn't even think about this. Now I need to check my own ratio. Apparently, there's a rating scale too on our profiles!
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
Oh man! I didn't even think about this. Now I need to check my own ratio. Apparently, there's a rating scale too on our profiles!
I've been curious about that too... but I think it has something to do with the stars under our names like the "gold star member" stuff. And I think that's just linked to the number of posts and interaction. 'Cause currently I'm only at 3/10, and I have 3 stars as a "bronze member," but I have 0 dislikes, so it can't be based on like/dislike ratio.
v42: - - - HM
That makes sense. Some of us old-timers have been around here a while.
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
Apparently, there's a rating scale too on our profiles!
I thought that was just post count discretized into 10 levels, but it appears to be more complicated than that. Like @bootzenkatzen said, I think it's a combo of post count and likes.
VOL 40 2nd Quarter: Third Place ("Ashes to Ashes, Blood to Carbonfiber")
Past submissions: R - HM - HM - HM - HM - HM - SHM - SHM
www.jd-writes.com
Kindle Vella - Ashes to Ashes, Earth to Kaybee
I've been curious about that too... but I think it has something to do with the stars under our names like the "gold star member" stuff. And I think that's just linked to the number of posts and interaction. 'Cause currently I'm only at 3/10, and I have 3 stars as a "bronze member," but I have 0 dislikes, so it can't be based on like/dislike ratio.
This seems to be correct. I currently have a ratio of 2/10, 0 dislikes, 33 likes and 27 (now 28) posts. Which makes me an 'advanced member' with two green stars. So, I think the ratio thing is just linked to how many forum posts you've made.
A few times I have mentioned my finalist, but usually only in my bio.
Maybe you should try, depending on your current sales results.
DQ?
"You had one job!"
Any goss?
May help other writers avoid a pitfall.
And another dislike!
For what?
This is getting ridiculous.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
I just disliked this post. FYI.
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
Quote data-userid="6571" data-postid="59756"]
As if it hasn’t been pointed out to you many, many times. No one needs to justify themselves at this point.
Did you just use fighting words?
What a shambles.
Apologies, I did not mean to dislike this post. I misclicked.
Mussel memory I guess.
incredibly rude post
James, joke. Joke, James.
I should have called you out and explained immediately rather than just hitting dislike.
Thank you.
And there is no benefit to spamming an account with dislikes.
So why do you do it?
Every individual dislike you've received from me has been earned on its own merits.
Apologies, I did not mean to dislike this post. I misclicked.
I'm not even going to say what you are, there is some polite company here, somewhere.
But I think Marty said it best.
And dislikes serve a purpose: when someone appears to be trolling, another user can check their like/dislike ratio on their profile.
The account tells nothing of what the dislikes are about, misclicks and Tannens included.
It makes it incredibly apparent who is well meaning (even if you disagree with them) and who is deliberately being contrary.
Again, dislikes tell the public nothing.
Only that there are people who will dislike you for whatever reason, justified or otherwise.
I'm only at 3/10
I was 4/10 last I checked.
You been getting shot in the back too?
No dislikes though?
Odd.
Some of us old-timers have been around here a while.
Eyes dart, whistling.
I think it's a combo of post count and likes.
I think the creators preempted your mischief.
So, I think the ratio thing is just linked to how many forum posts you've made.
The stars seem to be.
"I just disliked this post. FYI."
Well, he had a gang.
PS
In Australia, writers are supporting one and other by boycotting Adelaide writer's week, that just kicked an author out.
The writers of the future forum has members who try to discredit/kick a fellow author out.
Disappointing.
But I do love chiasmus!
PPS
Fun fact:
Me, 105 posts, 17 dislikes and counting.
Morgan, 538 posts, 1 dislike.
James, 556 posts, 0 dislikes.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
I've been curious about that too... but I think it has something to do with the stars under our names like the "gold star member" stuff. And I think that's just linked to the number of posts and interaction. 'Cause currently I'm only at 3/10, and I have 3 stars as a "bronze member," but I have 0 dislikes, so it can't be based on like/dislike ratio.
This seems to be correct. I currently have a ratio of 2/10, 0 dislikes, 33 likes and 27 (now 28) posts. Which makes me an 'advanced member' with two green stars. So, I think the ratio thing is just linked to how many forum posts you've made.
There appears to be something more to it, and I think it's likes (but probably not dislikes?) as when you sort the members by post count you get different 'levels' mixed together:
See the gold stars mixed in with the platinum shields? Those users are lower 'levels' than the users around them/with lower post scores, and also happen to have a few less likes; I assume because they were more active before the Likes/Dislikes were introduced, or at least before they became more frequently used.
VOL 40 2nd Quarter: Third Place ("Ashes to Ashes, Blood to Carbonfiber")
Past submissions: R - HM - HM - HM - HM - HM - SHM - SHM
www.jd-writes.com
Kindle Vella - Ashes to Ashes, Earth to Kaybee
I still wonder if a troll isn't someone who aims to provoke and upset someone by continuing to dislike their posts.
And this is supposed to be a winner?
Sounds like a loser to me.
(Yes, he did it again)
I hope editors are taking not of how he treats aspiring writers.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
And another dislike!
For what?
This is getting ridiculous.
Dude, if the moderators cared about people getting dislikes, they wouldn't have made it a feature of the forum. You complaining about it all the time just draws attention to it.
Take your own advice and lighten up.
SHM - 4
HM - 11
R - 11
My published works
Dude
Hmm..?
No.
More the kid with the marshal.
"Never give them an inch."
they wouldn't have made it a feature of the forum.
Features can be abused.
You complaining about it all the time just draws attention to it.
Well, dah!
Take your own advice and lighten up.
While people continue to bully and harrass me?
What about the next person they target?
No, I think not.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
3 more dislikes from James and reigheena.
As if it couldn't get more childish.
Interesting how they are all coming from the same people, not that they are targeting me, of course.
I'll do my best to record them as they occur.
If I get fed up, I've got 1,000+ to dish out already.
But don't let these people win.
If your being bullied or harassed here, don't leave or be silent about it.
There are some nice people here and it's a good resource.
Don't let them beat you, that's what bullies want, don't give in to them.
PS
It's a bit like phone scammers, if you have the time, waste theirs so they can't bully other people.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
@nova I just recorded a podcast episode with the first readers and the Coordinating judge which is scheduled to go up on 23 Jan. There is an earlier episode with Jody Lynn Nye shortly after coming on as Coordinating Judge discussing the significance of the different levels of WOTF. These can answer a lot of questions about what they look for, what constitute turn offs, etc.
I specifically created the rules for the forum to keep it a safe space for all writers and illustrators joining in.
Our system is a workable system and the HM, SHM, etc were implemented to provide a sense of whether one is improving or not. We created the free online writing workshop, which now has about 10,000 writers who have enrolled, which was responsible for a marked increase in the quality of story submissions.
I routinely see a press release every other week or so with a newly published author listing in their bio that they won an HM in WOTF. I hope you are able to appreciate what Writers of the Future has to offer aspiring writers as compared to other contests and other forums. We are unique also in trying to provide tools and recognize the rightness of anyone trying to learn the craft of writing and illustrating.
I had three alerts forwarded to me regarding your posts today. I'm not here to fight you. I rarely involve myself in the forum. I only ask that you be considerate of other aspiring writers who are working to improve their craft in a safe environment.
Thank you.
John Goodwin
I had three alerts forwarded to me regarding your posts today.
Well I'm getting loads of nonsense dislikes from a small group, so you've nothing to complain about.
I'm not here to fight you.
Like, what?
I rarely involve myself in the forum.
Maybe you should, then it may not be in such a state.
I only ask that you be considerate of other aspiring writers who are working to improve their craft in a safe environment.
I'm not the ones bullying, harrassing and ganging up on people.
It sounds like at last one other person has already left due to their treatment here.
Where theres two.
But I won't cave to the mob.
That's why they called you.
Just like bully children at school.
Unmask a bully and it's the victims fault.
They are all the same.
Pathetic.
But they'll tire eventually.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
I'm not the ones bullying, harrassing and ganging up on people.
I haven't read all your posts, but those I've seen are consistently snarky and dismissive towards fellow forum members.
You've also made negative comments about "immigrant" writers, Elliott Page (a trans man), and other people, that come across as prejudiced.
A couple of posts in your "Do you modernise" thread for specifics:
"normal caucasian male authors" is racialised framing and implies non-Caucasian male authors aren't normal.
"some bloke apparently played the pregnant girl" about Elliott Page is misgendering and transphobic framing.
"I don't think a typical 50s family would approve either" - if they had the outdated values that were common at the time, maybe they wouldn't approve.
Keep things respectful and avoid digs about identity, and I believe you'll find this forum a valuable place.
I'm going to leave things there and hope this thread can get back to a valuable discussion about the RWC tier. I'm excited to listen to the podcast John mentioned above.
35: - R R R | 36: R HM R R | 37: HM HM HM SHM | 38: HM HM HM HM | 39: HM HM HM SHM | 40: HM R SHM SHM | 41: R HM SHM R | 42: HM R R HM
5 SHM / 15 HM / 11 R
It sounds like at last one other person has already left due to their treatment here.
That other person joined a small writing group that included immigrants and members of the LBGTQ community and got upset that xenophobic, homophobic, and transphobic comments were not welcome despite her cries of "free speech!" After several requests to stop, and her continued tirade, she was civilly asked to leave the writing group. She took her hate and anger here. The mods removed it per forum rules, and that caused her to leave the forum.
Do you disagree with that treatment?
VOL 40 2nd Quarter: Third Place ("Ashes to Ashes, Blood to Carbonfiber")
Past submissions: R - HM - HM - HM - HM - HM - SHM - SHM
www.jd-writes.com
Kindle Vella - Ashes to Ashes, Earth to Kaybee
I think there are benefits to receiving an RWC. I managed to turn an RWC to an HM by starting the story later. My most recent RWC/R was liked by a pro-level editor, but felt the story read too young for their audience [they even suggested a specific market for the story which is above and beyond]. I think the main reasons my stories get an RWC are: failure to launch and too young of an audience. It's good to know what to work on to earn certificates and hopefully win a publication credit [and fabulous workshop]. I have a tendency to write from the POV of young characters [I still remember how the world felt when I was eleven and it was such a fun age to be. And also, some of my favorite books are told from a young POV: Kipling's Kim, Card's Ender Game, etc.]. The slow start I THINK is because the inciting incident needs to happen by the second page. That can be hard to do when attempting to set the stage of a different world [both fantasy and science fiction].
Thanks @johngoodwin for setting up the upcoming podcast with first readers and coordinating judge. I can't wait to consume it and take notes.
This is such a kind and nurturing group of talented writers and artists, and those are the posts I want to read.
WOTF results:
Vol 43: Q1 Pending, Q2 in progress
running totals to date:
WOTF: 7 Rs, 4 RWCs, 8 HMs, 2 SHMs
IOTF: 4 Rs, 3 HMs
Check out my new website: https://www.amyrwethingtonwriterofspeculativeworlds.com/
According to Winston Churchill, "success is going from failure to failure with enthusiasm"
Somehow I lost my Guthington profile, but it's me. Amy Wethington = Guthington = Physa
The slow start I THINK is because the inciting incident needs to happen by the second page. That can be hard to do when attempting to set the stage of a different world [both fantasy and science fiction].
This is where reading other short stories helps - you can see how other authors solve the problem you're having. There's been multiple times when I've read a story, then go back and been shocked that it was only 3,000 words long. The story elements are so dense, it feels longer.
SHM - 4
HM - 11
R - 11
My published works
I’m excited to catch that podcast!
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
"normal caucasian male authors" is racialised framing and implies non-Caucasian male authors aren't normal.
Well, that's one way to read it.
Cheers.
I needed a laugh.
"some bloke apparently played the pregnant girl" about Elliott Page is misgendering and transphobic framing.
Go look at the Wikipedia page.
You'll be confused too.
The poster clearly says Ellen.
She was happy enough with her name at the time.
Ellen Page was in Juno.
Read it and weep.
You've also made negative comments about "immigrant" writers,
Have I?
"I don't think a typical 50s family would approve either" - if they had the outdated values that were common at the time, maybe they wouldn't approve.
?
If they were common at the time, how would they be outdated?
hope this thread can get back to a valuable discussion about the RWC tier.
Amen.
Do you disagree with that treatment?
That's sounds rather threatening.
Yawn.
This is such a kind and nurturing group of talented writers and artists, and those are the posts I want to read.
Ah, so sweet the innocent.
But, yes, it would beat the tripe some here are serving up.
I appreciate you trying to keep the sanity.
Let us hope.
PS
I'll just note the general hypocrisy of defending someone who's not here because of what thay choose to call themself, Vs not defending writers who are here and left or are here and are being bullied.
Sorry to Alex, but it's fitting with the general vibe.
Look at what's happening with Adelaide writer's week.
One's kicked out, 50 boycott.
Writers should stick together.
PPS
And why it's being suggested that speculative science fiction and fantasy writers are all supposed to think the same way, God only knows.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
hope this thread can get back to a valuable discussion about the RWC tier.
Amen.
*sigh* we had gotten back on topic, but you just couldn't let things lie, could you? You *had* to be right.
You want to know why I disliked your posts? It's because I didn't want to derail the topic further, or escalate things by arguing you, but still express my discontent. That's not bullying.
Writers should stick together.
This doesn't mean what you think it means. It means that we work together to help each other learn. Yes, that means correcting someone when needed. You broke the social contract of this forum. We tried to correct you, you doubled down. So, we did the *professional* thing and escalated to the mods instead of letting the forum escalate into a verbal brawl. And instead of accepting the mod's warning, you criticized him.
If you get banned, you will have no one to blame but yourself.
SHM - 4
HM - 11
R - 11
My published works
K. R. Queen joins the naughty list.
Only 32 posts, thank God.
Credit due to Morgan and Alex for explaining things I was unaware of.
Obviously lots of talk going on away from the forum.
*sigh* we had gotten back on topic, but you just couldn't let things lie, could you? You *had* to be right.
You forgot "hypocrite warning."
You just did exactly the same thing!
I was just answering some outstanding questions of your gang, after I took a day to think if I would come back.
Decided to take my own advice and not let bullies win.
It's because I didn't want to derail the topic further
Like you have chosen to do now.
escalate things by arguing you
Like you have chosen to do now.
That's not bullying.
Well, as it's exactly the thing I brought up and people are just continuing to do it to be so and so's, yes, it is bullying.
And what is this latest post then, anyway, if dislikes are apparently used not to bully?
It means that we work together to help each other learn.
It means not ganging up on and victimising other writers in places of writing, like writers week or this forum.
I'm not sure what is to learn from the bullying I am enduring, other than the writers of the future forum harbours bullies.
Yes, that means correcting someone when needed.
Does not a dislike make.
You broke the social contract of this forum.
I'd really, really like to see the rules sometime.
I've already mentioned to Morgan, other forum's rules have already been broken by your gang several times.
I feel ganging up and bullying are more antisocial behaviour.
We tried to correct you, you doubled down.
Correct me on what?
You were, and still are bullying me.
I don't give in to bullying.
No one should.
Even now you complain that I responded to some posts.
You say I did something wrong in that, yet you are doing exactly the same thing now and it's supposed to be suddenly ok?
You thought you had beaten me into submission.
Now your angry you failed.
Now your making mistakes, like doing the very thing you complain I did.
. So, we did the *professional* thing and escalated to the mods
See, you admit to trying to escalate things.
Two mistakes and counting.
Things really are falling apart, aren't they.
You could see you couldn't break me, so you ran to teacher and told tall tales, typical bullying tactics.
Not very professional.
l* thing and escalated to the mods instead of letting the forum escalate into a verbal brawl.
Yet, here you are, back again, because teacher has more sense.
mod's warning,
?
you criticized him.
?
If you get banned, you will have no one to blame but yourself.
Why would I be banned?
Again, is that a threat?
Your having a Mitchell and Webb moment, your the baddies.
The fact your at me again, while saying I am wrong to comment and that you think dislikes are more palatable, and bringing up me being banned and admitting to trying to escalate things, is clear proof of that.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
So anyway, back to the topic at hand…
The big benefit I can see of an RWC compared to a straight R is you at least know you checked off all the entry requirements. A straight R usually means you violated some anthology norm. Too graphic, too many F bombs, offensive towards marginalized groups, not actually a fantasy or sci-fi story, etc.
Back in the day, Dave Farland said he received entries that were recipes, love letters, drawings, rambling illegible nonsense, and the like. Straight DQ’s if not straight R’s.
I believe they still receive those kinds of entries, which tells me there are an awful lot of people out there who aren’t really interested in writing. They just want attention.
"There are three rules to writing a novel. Unfortunately, no one knows what they are."
— W. Somerset Maugham
Drop me a line at https://morganbroadhead.com
SFx1
HMx6
R/RWCx6
So anyway, back to the topic at hand…
100%
And thanks to you and Alex, I just realised what the real issue was all along.
No surprises there.
Exactly like the video I have previously mentioned.
Go crack a bud light buddy, you deserve it.
A straight R usually means you violated some anthology norm. Too graphic, too many F bombs, offensive towards marginalized groups, not actually a fantasy or sci-fi story, etc.
Hang on, aren't they on the RWC list?
Or do you mean before RWC?
Back in the day, Dave Farland said he received entries that were recipes, love letters, drawings, rambling illegible nonsense, and the like. Straight DQ’s if not straight R’s.
I thought that would be half the fun.
Even letting the odd one slip through.
"Third place, Ma's spaghetti."
They just want attention.
Go, one more, your not driving.
RxLOTS
HMx1 (somewhere in the middle)
The big benefit I can see of an RWC compared to a straight R is you at least know you checked off all the entry requirements. A straight R usually means you violated some anthology norm. Too graphic, too many F bombs, offensive towards marginalized groups, not actually a fantasy or sci-fi story, etc.
I disagree with that. I've gotten 2 straight Rs since RWC came out. One of them featured an LDS character interacting with LDS doctrine (feeling the Spirit) in a fantastical way. So, not explicitly against the norm of a religious agenda, but better suited to a niche market (where it was published after some revision).
The other met the entry requirements, but just wasn't written well. I revised it up to an HM and then a SHM before shipping it out to other markets where it has gotten many rejections.
SHM - 4
HM - 11
R - 11
My published works
