posted
The Fragments and Feedback forum should be about just that, fragments and feedback. It looks sloppy, and seems stupid when we digress and begin to contradict others in that setting that should be about the fragment of the Author and their feedback to it.
Not only does it seem rude, but it is rude, and I for one don't like it. It is tantamount to butting in. My comments to the author are between me and the author, and if you disagree with what I've said and wish to discuss it elsewhere that is one thing, but to Criticize my Critique under the guise of commentary to the author is dishonest. Especially when you directly quote phrase for phrase something that wasn't intended for you, for the sole purpose of criticizing that and barely, if at all, mentioning the fragment.
I think if you have issue with something someone has posted as a critique, It is really not your place to criticize it in a forum not intended for that. Instead let us make another topic (like this one) and discuss it there.
After all this is the "Open Discussions About writing" forum. Which is more loosely labeled to justify it's use as a forum for discussion about the Fragments and Feedback forum and many other uses besides.
I think this is a sensible way to solve the problem. All in favor say "Aye"
Aye
[This message has been edited by in_defiance22 (edited January 30, 2005).]
Your model seems overly restrictive, and inclined to squash conversation and learning from each other. If I disagree with a crit, and feel inclinded to say so, I will. Otherwise, I'd be letting what I believe to be bad or misleading advice stand, which I don't think benefits the author.
posted
One of the best ways to learn how to write is not, despite popular belief, feedback of your own work but rather feedback of other people's work. This is true for a lot of reasons, but mainly because you have too much at stake in your own work. Learning from other's mistakes is both wise and benefitial.
That said, discussions of work that can and should go beyond reflections to the author. This may help the author, especially if a point is hotly contested or widely agreed upon, but it also helps all those who join in the discussion to fine tune their own skills. They see what works and what doesn't work and why. If someone says, "You should never begin a story with dialogue." which is, in fact, something I've heard, and no one says otherwise then the readers may all begin to think that they're doing it wrong when, in fact, it is just one opinion. If, on the other hand, others weigh in and suggest that it does work sometimes, maybe or maybe not in the example, then you have learned instead of being left in the dark.
Ignorance helps no one. Silence helps no one. And I do not believe that the Fragments and FEedback section was meant as a dialogue between an author and twenty differen feedbackers one-on-one. If someone is being rude, and they can and have been that way before, then that is one thing, but simple discussion should be encouraged.
posted
If you'd like a private conversation with the author, perhaps e-mail would be a better approach than posting on a public discussion forum.
Posts: 1750 | Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted
I may have been rude without intending it. I wrote the offending post just after waking from a fitful sleep -- my wife is ill and feverish, which kept me up, too -- and after a late night critiquing a story, as well as writing my own.
I need to learn not to post any messages until I've been awake for a few hours. That might help. I'm always grumpy in the morning.
[edit: I also need to learn to stop omitting words, too. Yay for the edit feature.]
[This message has been edited by HSO (edited January 30, 2005).]
posted
Damn people (and by people, I mean in_defiance22), if you're going to get your feelings hurt any time someone contradicts you, maybe a forum for literary CRITIQUE isn't the place for you.
Seriously, if you don't like what someone says, JUST IGNORE IT. Taking it personally is retarded, seeing as how we're all just anonymous screen names who have never met in the real world.
If you want somebody to cry to, go join a support group.
posted
wetwilly, I think you were a little strong there.
The feedback in Fragments and Feedback can be on the fragment, but it can also be used to discuss feedback. (In other words, what Christine said.)
We need to avoid getting personal here, both in what we say to each other (wetwilly, calling someone retarded for taking something personally is also getting personal) and, as wetwilly said, we shouldn't take things personally, even if it appears that they were intended that way.
posted
Thanx, wetwilly, really like the way you get really personal with the name calling to prove your point on not getting personal.
Also for those interested the whole thing started with a post, which felt very much like a haughty attack on something that had nothing to do with the fragment, thus my complaint that such things ought to take place under a different topic. Perhaps some should read the particular post which is located under the "fragments and feedback" with the name "its time had come 2" for further review as to what is an acceptable discussion, and what is just irrelevant and seemingly hostile for that particular setting.
The main objection I have and which I believe to be an even more "restrictive" model, is one where we can digress so far from the intended commentary that we forget the fragment altogether. Under this model, you post what you want where you want, but what happens is exactly what happened to me. An opinion is attacked and in some cases (obviously not my own) this will stifle further opinions from being expressed. Yes on a personal basis I try to live up to my name but alot of people who are just trying to be helpful with what knowledge they have would just quit trying to offer their opinion altogether if they had to endure attacks every time they tried. Thus we lose the contributions of those who don't want to have to fight for saying one simple thing. I say leave it up to the author to decipher which opinions are good and which are not, and if someone cares enough about what I've said we can go battle it out elsewhere. As is the case right now.
The bottom line is some people are not assertive, they will not express their opinions if they think their going to be attacked, and yet they still can provide valuable assistance and valuable contributions to this forum, but not if we allow a hostile environment to prevail. Therefore we need to make a place where they are unassailable, where they can speak without fear of repercussions from somebody who in their own mind has a more valuable opinion. If those who want further discussion and debate would like to contradict them, they cannot, not under that forum. But they can post their own thoughts on another topic and invite others to it.
This, I posit, is a fair model. One that istead of squashing anything, would actually foster many more opinions, and add just plain decency and propriety to an internet community which badly needs it.
Thanx for reading my opinion, but you must remember that another person, perhaps someone who could have greatly contibuted to this forum would just have up and left and never came back. And our community as a whole would have been made lesser for it.
[This message has been edited by in_defiance22 (edited January 30, 2005).]
posted
No, the bottom line is: it's a message board. Don't waste your valuable writing and critiquing time with the small stuff. And this is the small stuff. Okay?
Now, mea culpas all around and I'll make a concerted effort not to challenge any more of your personal views. I'll leave that to others who might be more tactful about it.
But if it happens that someone does contradict you--and it will likely happen again--don't take it personally.
posted
There are times for diplomacy and time for honesty. This, I fear, is a time for both. I will, therefore, try to be as diplomatic as possible in my honesty.
I read the thread in question. I felt that HSO's comment was a digression, but it was neither a serious digression nor an attack. Digressions, in small doses, add to the flavor of the conversation on what is, after all, a message board. They spawn new ideas and new topics. In fact, most digressions, if interesting enough, find their way to new topics. Serious digressions that overrun a thread have happened, but usually Kathleen asks people to get back to the point. If not Kathleen, then it is up to the person who started the thread to keep it on track.
On-line message boards can be a difficult place to socialize. Without the advantage of non-verbal cues and tone of voice, it is easy to misunderstand and take offense. It is therefore the responsibility of each and every member to, well, not take offense. I have not always followed this sage advice, but I try, and I believe that, particularly lately, I have done much better than I did when I first started around here. I don't lash out at Survivor nearly as much as he deserves. (Smiley faces can show that a statement is meant in jest...a useful tool).
The thing is it just doesn't matter. People will be rude. People will be perceived as rude whether they were or not (and often this is a matter of opinion). People will think they were joking and someone else will think they were serious. When y ou find yourself faced with one of these situations you can either a.) ignore it or b.) fight. Fighting makes these uncomfortable and never resolves anything. Trust me. It never does. Never. Never ever.
I did come up with a plan c that worked for my last incident. I sent an e-mail to the person with whom I had the disagreement. (I won't go into detail, although if you want to dig through thousands of messages you can probably find it.) I don't know if it would always work, but taking indiscressions or supposed indiscressions into a more private forum allows both sides to maintain a certain amount of dignity. If you absoltuely cannot ignore it, this isn't a bad option, although I still think that 99 times out of 100 it is best to simply let it roll off. Go take a walk or a bath (with bubbles and bath salts and those efrevescent bath balls) or whatever relieves stress for you.
So please, please, please, please...let the little things go. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Assume, unless you can find a really good reason to suppose otherwise, that they are offering counterpoint instead of arguing. And if you've got reason to suppose otherwise then assume they're having a bad day. Offer your own counter-point (not argument), read, learn, and enjoy. That's what this forum is here for.
[This message has been edited by Christine (edited January 30, 2005).]
posted
in_defiance22, you keep using the word "attack" to describe HSO's post in the "Its Time Had Come 2" topic.
And you seem to be ignoring HSO's apologies, both in the "Its Time Had Come 2" topic and in this one.
I don't see what HSO posted as an attack. He quoted you and then went on to offer an alternative point. He did not make any kind of personal remark about your opinion, he just stated a differing opinion.
I hate to say it, but your lack of acknowledgement of his conciliatory posts is disturbing. Can you not see that this whole topic could as easily be construed as an attack on HSO?
Granted, people could choose to leave this forum because others disagreed with their comments, and that would be a loss all around, but people could also choose to leave this forum because others get upset when they disagree with their comments.
This kind of thing could go around and around, escalating with every turn.
I agree that if someone wants to discuss something tangential to a Fragment, they should start a topic in the Open Discussions on Writing area. But HSO has apologized for not doing that as well.
It isn't "small stuff" if feelings are hurt, but it also isn't "small stuff" if people insist on taking offense and ignore apologies.
I, too, am sorry because this has become such an issue. The disagreements that have taken place in this forum have wearied me many times, especially when none of the disagreers will back down.
Disagreement is part of discussion, though, so I usually let it go. If we all agreed, what would be the need of discussing?
What more do you want? I won't kick HSO off of the forum. He, at least, has apologized.
[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited January 30, 2005).]
posted
Man, I leave for two days, and you guys get all exciting on me. I'm staying rooted to my computer from now on.
Posts: 331 | Registered: Jan 2005
|
posted
It is often vital that people be able to get a "second opinion" on specific points of their posted fragments. If we make a rule that the first person to post an opinion on any specific point has spoken ex Cathedra, then we are denying the author a chance to get multiple perspectives on the submitted fragment. And that doesn't serve the purpose of the forum.
Taking things personally doesn't serve the purpose of the forum either.
posted
First, under the philosophy that an apology is never too late, I apologize to Anyone and Everyone whom might have taken offense by anything I have posted. This is the final post I will make under this topic. Not to get the last word in but to clarify to the best of my ability what It is I had issue with and what I think should and could be done about it.
Both myself and my wife have had bad experiences in other writing forums that are much much worse than this one. Where no one can post, and no one can express any opinion without being haggled to death about it. In my wife's case she decided it wasn't worth it and quit altogether. To her loss and to their loss. I too eventually quit. I saw the beginnings of that here almost the same day I joined.
Im saying this to show that in some cases it does happen, and probably happens quit often.
In response I proposed this idea; Let us seperate the two functions of a forum. One for open debate. Where if the members so choose they can join in and argue over anything they want.(kinda like what we are doing now) One for the free expression of opinions without rebuttal, and without any form of accusation or attack. No matter how well intentioned or otherwise.
In this way we can serve both types of people, and not infringe upon anyones right to freedom of speech.
I also want everyone to notice that in essence this is exactly what we are doing now. Can you imagine a forum where this whole discussion took place under the "its time had come 2" topic heading. I can and it sucks, nothing useful is ever said. But except for a few stray digressions in the post where all this started, we have by and large discussed all of this outside in a seperate forum, where everyone can and should expect their opinions to be rebutted, should they choose to join the conversation.
All this comes down to choice, and respect. In my proposed Idea, whoever chose to enter the forum for debate would have no argument that their feelings were hurt. They don't have to join if they don't want to. In the current system, apparantly, we don't have any choice in the matter at all for at any time under any post or forum you can expect to be debated for the most simple of remarks. And have them flaunted back at you in a disrespectful manner, whether you like it or not. I think it should be more of a choice. To be able to enter the section of debate and have your remarks scrutinized to death only by choice.
As to the thought that if I post my thought in the fragment and feedback section first it therefore means you can't enter your own about it, it is not at all what I mean or meant.
By believing this your assuming that humans cannot be civil, cannot be curteous. In the fragment section I comment to the author of the fragment, and If somebody else said something on the same subject, let the author surmise the best advice. I don't have to rebutt the other commentator to prove my own point, I don't even need to acknowledge him/her. I just speak my peace to the author and have done.
If you want to have more debate on the subject with the person you disagree with ask them politely if they would like more discussion about it in a seperate forum which you can create.
This gives everyone more freedom from oppression, and more freedom to choose if they want to join or not, not have it forced upon them.
In conclusion I can say that to some it may appear that I over reacted. And I admit the distinct possibility, and in reply I must say that If true, I over reacted only because I've seen where the current method leads and didn't like it, and so as soon as I saw the same thing here I immmediatly opposed it.
Ultimately the choice for civility is the up to the forum as a whole, I hope it's the correct choice
[This message has been edited by in_defiance22 (edited January 31, 2005).]
If you have something to offer as feedback on a fragment in the Fragments and Feedback area that disagrees with what someone else has offered, just offer your feedback.
Don't quote the other person's feedback.
If you are only clarifying or asking for clarification of what someone else offered as feedback, you may quote the other person's feedback if you need to.
This area is for discussion of general writing topics that may or may not have arisen from feedback offered in the Fragments and Feedback area. It can also be for disagreement, as long as everyone can be polite.
This is more or less how things have been going on this forum anyway, but please consider it specified now.
posted
I went to bed last night without giving this too much thought. It seemed like the ramblings of someone who was taking things too personally, and I even laughed about it.
But diplomacy is over.
Kathleen: please, please, please don't change the rules for this person. No one here has stepped forward to agree with a word he's said and in fact, there have been multiple disagreements. I'm not sure exactly what in_defiance22 is looking for in a forum, but I do think that it is beyond arrogant to step onto a forum for a week, take offense to a post that is entirely inoffensive to anyone else, and start demanding changes. Our hatrack community has shaped and grown over many years into a place that has been helpful to many and has attracted a surge of recent new membership. I am happy tot hink that I have been a small part of that for the last year and a half to two years now. Look at this community's success. We're obviously doing something right. Not to be tired and cliche, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. In fact, I believe that in_defiance22's original post was in regards to the fact that you can't make everyone happy. I think we should extrapolate that a bit...the same rule applies to this very message board. You can't make everyone happy, but we've sure made a lot of people happy. Through good days and bad, successes and failures, I've had this hatrack community behind me and unless I see an actual problem arising I don't see any point in making changes to either rule or custom.
Fragments and feedback works. If I have any complaints about it, it's that so many people are using it and posting new stories that it's impossible for me to get to them all. But with that are a lot of new voices that can balance out their requests with their own feedback, and so the system still basically works.
in_defiance22, I'm sorry you and your wife have had problems with other forums in the past, but quite frankly you're paranoid. I'm not saying that what's happened to them can't happen to hatrack. Particularly with the new wave of personalities that has come onto the board, it is possible for things to get out of hand, but they haven't yet, and Kathleen dooes an excellent job of laying down the law when she has to. I hope you can find a way to use and enjoy this site, but I will not be cowed into uselessly restrictive and potentially detrimental new rules without real justification. And the truth is that you need the forum members behind a change, because it is far easier to changea rule than it is to change a custom. This is the latter.
posted
Not only do I ditto what Christine said, but I'm a bit surprised that in_defiance22 even brought this up. His very first post on the thread in question did exactly what he's annoyed about -- it contradicted Survivor's critiquing post:
quote:I'm surprised at how much this is improved
quote:personally I like the other version better
This thread may be tangential, but any post that assists a posted fragment, whether it's a direct or indirect critique, is fair game for F&F. An overabundance of rules will just stifle free exchange and creativity.
I have been a member for a year and lurked here for about a year before I started posting. I have never seen more than a few disagreements that got nasty. This is a very friendly and productive place. I have learned a lot. When I get something published, it will be in a large part because of my buddies on Hatrack.
People have disagreed with me before, and that's fine. Often they have a valid perspective that I can learn from, even if I don't like it.
To my understanding, Frag and Feedback is all about what the reader will think when they read the story, or frag. So whatever the reviewer thinks is valid. Chances are some percentage of the reader pool will agree with what the reviewer says. That's valuable info.
posted
Although Christine’s advice about sending private e-mails to deal with online disagreements is basically sound, I do think that an online response to an online offense, perceived or otherwise, is healthy and proper. Otherwise, silence can be read to signify agreement. There have been a number of misconceptions/disagreements that have worked themselves out without bloodshed on the site, and that's to the credit of the online community here.
Protracted or nasty battles, though, should go offline, especially if they’re merely personal in nature and not related to writing. Before even getting to that point, though, giving each other the benefit of the doubt and a lot of gentle tolerance will go a long way toward heading off hurt feelings.
posted
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally I like it when someone contradicts my advice. It gives me the opportunity to question my own beliefs and learn something.
Also I find it invaluable in Fragments and Feedback when the feedback involves some debate. There are few absolutes in writing, so I like to see opinions on all sides. Opinions without question or rebuttal are useless and, ironically, counter to the concept freedom of speech.
Not that this is a freedom of speech issue. Hatrack is not the government and cannot suppress your ability to express yourself elsewhere. However, as part of the writer's group community, we agree behave according to Kathleen's guidelines to facilitate reasonably polite discussions that improve all our writing skills. Sanitizing our opinions and pretending not to disagree is counter-productive to improving our writing.
Quoting someone else's posts as reference points is an essential tool in conversations that take place over long periods of time (or seem that way because of the nature of message boards.)
I hereby request and recommend that anyone who deems it necessary to quote my posts do so. And I vow to keep my sense of humor even if I am referred to as "uninformed, wrong, silly, retarded," or anything else signifying disagreement with my opinion.
Writers need to have thick skins to take criticism, bravery to be able to make good use of the criticism, and grace to tamp down our pride when our emotions run too hot. Until you develop these essential tools, no amount of politeness is going to help you become that great writer everyone participating here wants you to become.
Kathleen, I join with Christine and the others in saying: Hatrack isn't broke. Please don't try to fix it.
posted
But please don't see this as an invitation to leave the forum, defiance. It's not that your views aren't welcome...it's just that we don't like being forced into someone else's mold.
posted
Christine has been so very right-on in this discussion!
Go, girl!
The truth is that once in a while there's some bit of a flare up, some niggling argument, some idiot says or does something that offends someone else or some other idiot becomes offended by something that was never intended to be offensive. Interestingly enough, it's usually because some newby decides to stir things up a bit. But those who stay eventually settle into the rhythm and everyone gets along fine. Even with HSO
The truth is that Hatrack is very probably THE most civil and supportive writer's forum out there.
Give it some time, Defiance. Don't throw away an amazing opportunity over a single offense--perceived or real.
Real offense=what Wetwilly said. Naughty boy. *SPANK*
Perceived offense=pretty much anything HSO says (you just have to realize that he lacks the talent of tact and love him anyway).
quote:Perceived offense=pretty much anything HSO says (you just have to realize that he lacks the talent of tact and love him anyway).
That's true. It's part of my charm actually, and one of the reasons my wife married me. Seriously, I always get gigged on lack of tact on a forum, but never in real life. I'm actually quite likable -- haven't been in a fight in 18 years -- I was 15 then -- and I was jumped by 5 crazy cats after church-league basketball game (I might've fouled someone a little too deliberately). So pttttbbh. (how's that for tact?)
posted
I read the thread in question. I'm amazed this thread exists at all.
I agree with Mike and many others here. Sometimes quoting what a critiquer said can avoid a misunderstanding. My vote: let F&F continue as it is.
I also want to add that this is the most calm, ordered, respectful, interesting, rational board I've ever been lucky enough to participate in. I'd hate to see rules imposed where they aren't necessary.
quote:I also want to add that this is the most calm, ordered, respectful, interesting, rational board I've ever been lucky enough to participate in. I'd hate to see rules imposed where they aren't necessary.
Absolutely!
in_defiance22, if you really want a confrontation (as your name suggests) go to Scrawl. Hah! The ladies over there will eat you alive.
However, if you want to improve your writing, please stay involved here! We need people like you. You're interesting, albeit a bit disorderly per the culture of this board, which is no big deal. You can change if you want to. I have managed to fit in (although by reining myself WAY BACK!) and if I can do it, you certainly can.
posted
I think that one of the requirements for a forum like this one is trust. You have to believe that no one is making a personal attack, and not the opposite.
This allows us to disagree and quibble over quabbles without getting our nose put out of joints. There is more than one way towards good writing, and I'd like to think the people here are encouraged to follow the path of their choice.
There have been many stories posted that I personally don't want to crit, because I don't like those types of stories. But there is a never ending supply of volunteers to read these stories.
Such a diverse group needs a diverse nature. Occasionally people get upset and people argue. But I have seen two people here argue, and then a few days later one of them offered to crit the other's work. I trust the people here enough to post my work and my views, even though I know Survivor will always correct me. In such ways do I learn.
posted
i too felt odd when i read the rule change... i mean, why should there need to be a rule that whose sole purpose is to stop people from feeding off of each other and learning one from another? isn't that the whole purpose of this forum even existing?
if you can't handle tangents, maybe writing isn't what you should go into. writers are very definitely prone to bouts of going seemingly off-topic, and then finding some odd way of showing it to actually be perfectly in-topic.
if you can't handle disagreement then you shouldn't be online at all, but in a cave somewhere. people disagree, it's healthy and natural. ANYTHING that discourages clean and orderly disagreement is detrimental and wholly unnatural.
EDIT: i forgot to thank Kathleen for cancelling the rule change.
[This message has been edited by dpatridge (edited January 31, 2005).]
posted
Thank you, Kathleen. And now, I think, this dead horse has been beaten. Unless someone has something profound to add, perhaps we can let in_defiance off the hook? Posts: 3567 | Registered: May 2003
|
posted
Does anyone else find it ironic that a person complaining about others critiquing another's critique is, by doing so, critiquing another’s critique?
Posts: 341 | Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted
"Retarded" comment officially retracted. Apologies all around. I caught you this delicious bass, wanna play me?
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Dec 2003
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
