# Dear Fellow Authors: GROW UP



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

I woke up this morning to the following in my mailbox. YES, I am angry. YES, I am frustrated. Because two of these people are people I have seen in this forum, which makes it even MORE aggravating because these are people who should have expected no less but honesty from me. I don't pretend to be something I'm not. I don't act one way in the forum and another in private.

I had three situations. One is a book I had agreed to review, one is a book I declined to review, and one is a book that the author offered an excerpt for my newsletter.

For the one I had agreed to review, I got through the first four chapters and found significant problems with the book that prevented me from completing it. As is my custom (and something that I have said repeatedly in this forum AND I inform authors of directly before they send me their book&#8230;it is not a surprise), I send the author I private e-mail noting my concerns. I also told the author that I WOULD finish the book and write the review anyway if the author wanted me to do so (because some authors do feel any review is better than no review) but I wanted to give the author the choice. So this is the reply I get:



> Just wanted to let you know that whatever you think of my book, I am not doing it to make money. As you can see below. And I will not be dealing with anything with Bards.


Well, BOO HOO to you. What, you aren't going to buy any of my books now? Aren't going to advertise in my publication? Did you want my honest opinion or just a pat on the back? You came to me and asked me for a review. I told you what I would do, and I did it. You can disagree with my opinions. You can ignore them. But don't send me your passive-aggressive BS.

Fine, whatever. So I move on through my e-mails. Someone had requested a book review, but I sent them an e-mail declining it because, after going and looking at the preview, there were just so many obvious errors (grammar, spelling, weird formatting, double-spacing, etc) that I couldn't review the book in good conscious. I told the individual I couldn't review the book and why, and even went so far as to offer to help him with the formatting and put him in touch with one of my proofreaders to help him. So this is the reply I get:



> NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON'T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY BOOKS IF YOU CANT JUST READ THE STORY AND IGNORE A FEW TYPOS CAUSE PROFESSIONAL BOOKS HAVE TYPOS TOO AND I BET YOU DON'T BITCH ABOUT THEM.


Alrighty, then. Must be something in the water today.

The last was someone who had offered an excerpt to include in my monthly newsletter. I sometimes include sample chapters of indie authors' books in my newsletter, with a link to the book. I don't charge a fee for this. I do it for free because it gives my readers something and helps promote other authors. But it is MY newsletter, and MY readers, and I have to make decisions as to what I do and do not include in the newsletter because it reflects on me. And that means I am not including an excerpt that is effectively torture porn. I don't publish that sort of stuff. I don't promote that sort of stuff. My readers would have a cow if I exposed them to that sort of stuff without some sort of warning. So I declined the excerpt, and explained to the author that it was inappropriate, but if he had another book that was more in line with our themes I would be happy to consider it.

I won't reproduce the reply here, because it would be a violation of the forum terms. But there was a reference to knowing where I live in it. Use your imagination to fill in the blanks.

Why am I posting this here? Because as I said, two of these people I have seen in THIS FORUM. If this is how people are treating potential reviewers, is it any wonder so many people don't take self-publishers seriously? Is it any wonder people just won't review self-published books? We can all smile and laugh and pretend it is because they are jealous or want to keep self-publishers down or elitist or whatever. But none of that is true. People don't want to deal with self-publishers because they act like PSYCHOS when they don't get their way.

And if the people in this forum want to try to "defend" their behavior, I will post the exact e-mails I send so that the rest of the forum can judge for themselves how PSYCHO you are. There was nothing in my replies that was anything but professional and honest. Those replies were written to help support my fellow writers and help them improve their work. They weren't one sentence "You suck" insults, but detailed, thoughtful critiques that I agonized over writing to make sure they were helpful.

You can disagree with those critiques. You can ignore them. You can wrap up in your security blanket and tell yourself I am just wrong. That's fine. Do what you want with the information. But don't attack me for doing what I told you I would do and for doing what you asked me to do for you.

People, we need to get our acts together. We need to grow the hell up. We need to stop acting like we are in high school and attacking people just because our feelings get hurt. If we are ever going to be taken seriously, this sort of crap must stop. This isn't a "OMG feel sorry for *****" rant. This is a serious warning. Because if you are doing this to me, you are also doing it to other people. You do it to me, I come here and yell and keep it "in the family." You do this to others, they do it on the Amazon community forums or their blogs and websites and make the entire self-publishing industry look bad. Send these kinds of responses to your local newspaper reviewer or a regional magazine or a popular blogger and you destroy the credibility of every other self-published author by acting like a spoiled brat. Every single one of these responses I got this morning reinforces every negative stereotype the general public has about self-publishers.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

I agree with you 100% on this Julie.  You shouldn't have to put up with this kind of crap.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Some authors simply don't see it as anyone's place to critique their work. Yet they then send that work to reviewers. There's so many things wrong with this. A god-complex assuming you couldn't ever get a bad review, or that if you do get one, it is clearly the reviewers fault? An ego the size of a house that says anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot? I don't know.

Oh, and I -hate- the argument "I don't do this for money" bit to justify any errors or problems with a work. You're in a public marketplace. You're sending it to a reviewer to get more exposure/reviews. You're playing with the big boys, so while you may not expect money, you're still trying to get yourself out there, and therefore you need to play by the same rules as everyone else.

David Dalglish


----------



## FrankZubek (Aug 31, 2010)

I agree

Your 'threat' is kind of like what they (finally) do here in Ohio with people who drink and drive
They are issued a bright yellow license plate so that EVERYONE knows that they CANNOT handle their liquor

When  I see a yellow plate I literally slow down and give them plenty of space until they are safely out of my way
Personally, I dont see how they can still want to go out in public with that plate out there for all to see.

And actually....not to be a wet blanket....but just posting the quotes FROM their emails here (precious as they are) could anger them enough where they would fire off yet more emails back at you

And yet...what choice are you left with?
Your time is too valuable to waste on the few who don't 'get it' while providing a great service the rest of us here appreciate


----------



## Travis haselton (Jul 24, 2010)

O.K. It seems a topic of conversation on here alot lately. Bards, I completely and totaly respect you for have a critical opinion. It is accurate and not to mention if anyone where to want to be an author they should get used to bad press. After all it is the media and it does what it wants. I also respect you for having sent the authors private emails about it to inform them. Again I also respect you for not naming any names on the thread here when their behavior has clearly asked for it.

Personaly as a author I am looking for these kind of emails so I can fix the errors also when I release the whole series of short storys I am writing in one novel I can make changes to improve the story and make a more entertaining story for the readers. For anyone who does read my book. PLEASE tell me my errors. PLEASE do it the way Bards here did at first and keep it private. Authors PLEASE stop making a bad name for us idie's.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

I don't think there's any way any of those actions can be defended. It's a shame that author complexes can cause people to be so immature. The books we write really do go straight to our hearts. They matter to us. But it's really revealing what kind of a person someone is when they do something like that.

As for the second example, it sounds exactly the same as a guy getting shot down at a bar after hitting on some girl. After he's exposed himself (with his proposition), he's desperate to reclaim the high ground, and that means knocking down the girl as much as he can. It's just pathetic. 

Bards, brush off all three. They have everything to do with those authors' inner troubles and nothing to do with you.


----------



## Steven L. Hawk (Jul 10, 2010)

Wow.  Just wow.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

I think the only difference between indie publishing and mainstream is (or should be) that indies don't have to sit at the bottom of a slush pile to be read. We decide what to put before the public and we are in control of quality. If we can't be bothered to re-draft and edit (and better still, have our work edited) we have to be prepared to take the flack.

I think it is a great courtesy to inform the writer privately that you are unable to give a positive review. The general public probably won't be so kind. 

I've raised this issue in another thread -- should I refuse to review something I thought was really bad? The unanimous response was to review anyway. Unfortunately, bad reviews tend to become full-blown critiques (I don't like to say something's bad; I prefer to explain what didn't work for me). Then you get the criticism that reviews are not critiques. It's a hard one to win.


----------



## horse_girl (Apr 9, 2010)

Great warning, Julie. I suspect that the authors in question also don't get along with honest critters on critting sites, if they visit them. A lot of critiquing would help the attitude as well as the writing.

Writers need to grow thick skins. If they can't take critiques on their unpublished manuscripts, what makes them think they can take the opinions of readers and reviewers? Once a book is out there, it's open to all forms of criticism. Some people live in their own small worlds and don't want to hear the negative about their precious books. I've dealt with those kinds of people on critting sites and they only want to hear praise.

It's unfortunate you've had to deal with the attitude. I'd like to hope that people on KB are more professional than the average self-pub authors, but I guess that's not always the case.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

I am a little surprised that these are people from the board, though.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> I am a little surprised that these are people from the board, though.


I'm not. As much of a community as this is, there's still plenty here with the sole desire to sell books and nothing else.


----------



## Travis haselton (Jul 24, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> I'm not. As much of a community as this is, there's still plenty here with the sole desire to sell books and nothing else.


amen.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

So Julie, does this mean you have space for an excerpt in your upcoming newsletter  I, uhm...Under Witch Moon is available for excerpting.  

Just sayin'.  Anything to help out and all.


RE: the meat of the warning.   Julie is conveying what many, many agents have conveyed in blogs.  Agents have stopped providing feedback and critiques because of this type of response from unprofessional writers.  It hurts us all because some of us take feedback seriously--or at least treat it as one professional to another.   Write the email to the agent/reviewer/Julie.  Then save it in your draft folder, and glory in your fit--just don't hit send.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

Publishers and agents in the traditional system got these kinds of juvenile responses often, but just filed them in the wastebasket. Now the whiners have as much access to publication as anyone else, so we have to deal with them. They do make the rest of us look bad, but I don't know how to filter them out without going back to a gatekeeper system.


----------



## Cliff Ball (Apr 10, 2010)

Wow, that's rough. I once thought about doing reviews, but, I'm kind of glad I don't. I really dislike drama. now, when I get people who tell me there's something wrong with formatting, grammar, etc, I thank them, and I have gone back and tried to fix  those issues. But, really, dumping on you for just doing your job, not cool.


----------



## Sandra Edwards (May 10, 2010)

I'm at a loss for words over those email responses. That's simply amazing--and not in a good way.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> I am a little surprised that these are people from the board, though.


That was the thing that really got my blood boiling this morning. I've gotten this sort of stuff in the past, but sometimes you can chalk it up to "hey, they didn't know what they were getting into." But two of these people are people who I have seen here, and one would think that, having read enough of my posts to ask me for a review, they had also read enough of my posts to know what to expect.

My reason for posting this was to provide some perspective and alert folks. There HAVE been a lot of threads recently about reviews, and there is this tendency to villify reviewers or anyone that says something negative about self-publishing. We've talked about people who vote down negative reviews, or leave comments on reviews. We've had discussions about other forums that blast self-publishers. We've talked about sites that won't review self-pub books. And always we (as a group) tend to blame the reviewers. But what I'm bringing up in this thread are examples of what WE ourselves do to alienate reviewers and the general public.

These are not isolated incidents. My hope is that we will stop sugar coating things and hold ourselves more accountable. Maybe the next time a writer posts a thread asking people "how do I respond to a negative review" it won't devolve into a pity party with everyone going and voting down the review or telling the author "it's just one person's opinion they are probably jealous." Maybe the next time someone finds a thread elsewhere where people are blasting the quality of self-pub books, we'll temper our angst and try to understand what the complaints are and not just attack the posters. The things we do in this and other forums reinforces the behavior of what happened in my emails this morning.

I just want folks to realize that there are real reasons why some stereotypes persist. We need to address them honestly.


----------



## kcmay (Jul 14, 2010)

I agree with you, Julie. If we want others to take us seriously, we have to act professionally to both readers and other professionals in the field of books and publishing. If we just want to sell our books to friends and family and not make money, then we need to understand that we'll still be expected to conduct ourselves respectfully and respectably.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Holy cow, I'm pretty speechless.  I know there are people out there who feel as though any sort of criticism (constructive or otherwise) is a personal attack, or that the person offering said criticism is just "trying to put you down" or whatever, but holy cow.  You'd think if you're soliciting a review that you'd expect that.  And as for Mr./Ms. BDSM - hello - they should know from the get-go that their work isn't exactly "mainstream".

Color me boggled.


----------



## BP Myers (Jun 7, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> there were just so many obvious errors (grammar, spelling, weird formatting, double-spacing, etc) that I couldn't review the book in good conscious.


Happens to the best of us, I guess.


----------



## Rory Miller (Oct 21, 2010)

So where does a new writer go to find "reviewers" who give nothing but glowing praises for our work?

Oh yeah, Family Members.

(I'm just kidding)

  I just can't imagine anyone doing that to you, but then again there's a lot of stuff on the Internet that I just can't imagine anyone doing!


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I absolutely agree with your first post.  Not sure I agree that we've had so many threads here vilifying reviewers though.  

I mean, yes, there is a knee-jerk defensive reaction for many people,and yes, especially earlier there were calls to go "vote down" or "vote up" somethign over on Amazon, but cooler heads have always prevailed.  And lately the meat of such conversations has been ways to get past such issues, or they've been like this thread itself, all of the members sitting around and shaking their heads and saying "what's WRONG with these people?"

The problem with narcissistic types, though, is now culture wide.  And there's little we can do about it, except don't put up with bad behavior around you.  Call them on it.  Demand that people grow up all the time.  (And doing that may include holding your nose and voting.)

Camille


----------



## J Dean (Feb 9, 2009)

Very sorry to hear such things being written, and such personal attacks being made.  That's wrong; if you live in a glass house with regard to criticism, you shouldn't take up writing, and especially take up self-published indie writing.


----------



## LCEvans (Mar 29, 2009)

Wow. I totally don't understand this kind of behavior, but I know it's out there. I've learned to be careful when I review because some people think their writing is perfect. Sorry this happened to you, Julie. You don't deserve this--no one does. 

Linda


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

BP Myers said:


> Happens to the best of us, I guess.


There is a reason I have a proofreader. I know I suck at proofing my own stuff.


----------



## John Hamilton (May 6, 2010)

Julie, I'm sorry you had to deal with this.  I've been a magazine and book editor for many years, so I know how frustrating dealing with immature nutjobs can be.  

I wholeheartedly agree with your call to professionalism.


----------



## J Dean (Feb 9, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> There is a reason I have a proofreader. I know I suck at proofing my own stuff.


 I do, too, but unfortunately nobody else seems to want the job.


----------



## BP Myers (Jun 7, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> There is a reason I have a proofreader. I know I suck at proofing my own stuff.


Heh.

Thanks for having a sense of humor.


----------



## Joebruno999 (Oct 20, 2010)

Sorry this happened to you. I've been a published writer since the 1970's, and can't comprehend why someone would ask for a favor (review their book), then get angry when the review didn't make them the second coming of Hemingway.

Tomorrow will be a better day.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Julie,

I think I can honestly say that I feel your pain more than most. Truly, I deal with this kind of crap_ all the time_! I even did a post on "Authors Behaving Badly". I offset it with a post on "Authors Behaving Well" in hopes of showing some "good examples". The "crap" still continues, though.

I actually had an author post on a forum that his next book was going to be about "killing a reviewer." The person offered more details about the "new book" that really creeped me out.  I had to consider that a direct threat and reported the author.

I have been insulted more and called more names since I have become a reviewer than over the course of my entire 41 years added together. 

All I can really say to help is that there are a LOT of Indie authors who do make it worthwhile.

I do the same type of notification when I can't review a book for whatever reason. I recently had an author reply that they did want to know why. Instead of just saying it was filled with errors, I actually edited the first two pages of their novel (because they had sent it in Word) and sent it back. I held my breath, waiting for the viscious blast. It never came. The author was very nice and thanked me.  These types are the prevalent ones.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

BP Myers said:


> Heh.
> 
> Thanks for having a sense of humor.


it's easy for me to have a sense of humor when I have a cabal of kobolds on their way to your house.


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

I'm so surprised two of them came from Kindleboards members because of the sheer number of threads we've had saying how wrong that crap is. I don't recall ever reading a reply on here justifying that kind of reaction, I suppose saying it in public is different than saying it by email.     

I'm horrified at the bit about knowing where you live although I'm sure it's an empty threat.   But still . . . that's a screwed up thing to say.  Please say this wasn't from someone here.


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

sibelhodge said:


> It's a not a full moon, is it?


As a matter of fact....tomorrow is. 

That's just nuts, Julie. Boggles the mind that authors would do that, when they've *asked* for a review. Wow.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Farrell, that's because it is never us. It is always someone else. Other people throw big fits at bad reviews, but _I'm_ the smart one. _I'd_ never do that. But then when the email arrives, and it is saying my work isn't good enough for review and there's all these errors, bam. The hurt starts. Anger. Who is this woman to say my work isn't even good enough to get a freaking review? Mind goes out the window, fingers start typing an email, and then it is all over.

No one is going to stand up here and say they treat reviewers like this. But when reading a thread like this, they might silently roll their eyes, or mutter about how the stupid person deserves it, or we're all just a bunch of politically correct whiners, or justify it by saying all that matters is sales, and if someone won't help, then f*** 'em. And yes, I've been given a message by someone who used to frequent these boards (no longer, thank god) who had that exact mentality. I kept the message. It was too classic to delete.

David Dalglish


----------



## J.M Pierce (May 13, 2010)

That is just unreal. I can't imagine how mad I'd be if I were in your situation, especially if they threatened my home. Nothing would force me into anger faster than a threat to my family.

Take care and I hope your day gets better from here.
J.M.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> Farrell, that's because it is never us. It is always someone else. Other people throw big fits at bad reviews, but _I'm_ the smart one. _I'd_ never do that.


+1 to this.

It's hard to know how you'd react if you haven't been put in that situation. It was probably a month or two ago that a blogger had accepted my book for review but then told me it wasn't working out halfway through. Not enough romance. I'd much rather get the email saying it's a no-go than a bad review because my book wasn't in the reviewer's preferred genre.

P.S. the fake review by another author on my book's page went poof this morning.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Well done, Julie.

The only thing I would add or point out is that, as discouraging as this AM has been for you, please keep in mind... those few who are like that, I think, have to be the exception, not the rule.

Not ALL of us indies are psychos who can't take professional, constructive feedback. We might be psycho in other ways, LOL... like just for trying to succeed on an indie avenue sort of psycho... but for every few who don't know how to take critiques, I have to believe there are also a few of us who are professionals and who can do so.

The work each of us produces probably is indicitive of that, I suspect....

Personal example: When I was readying SHALL ARISE FIRST for Zombiepalooza, I solicited beta readers from KB. One just gave a general impression and that was helpful... pointed out a couple things I went on to correct. One gave a very extensie critique, filling the word document with changes and suggestions... I was thrilled with that! It definitely made SHALL ARISE FIRST a smoother read and I incorporated probably 95 percent of it... the other five percent were style choices, like whether to put thoughts in quotes or italics... (the third never got back to me, but 67% response is great for a small group of beta readers I was using for the first time.)

Anyone who thinks their writing can't be improved by feedback... probably isn't reading any writing other than their own. (Not a directed comment, just a general truism.)


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

I've gotten similar PMs from people who are offended that they cannot bump their Book Bazaar posts more frequently, or who have been reprimanded for other minor infractions. They understand why we have rules here, they just don't see why they apply to _them_.


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

Right on, Julie. I agree. I'm glad you posted this wake up call.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> P.S. the fake review by another author on my book's page went poof this morning.


w00t!


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Just a warning:

Posting this here quite probably will not make those authors "see the error of their ways." You are possibly opening yourself up for yet more retaliation via e-mail, other forums, etc.  Be prepared.

One thing I do when I get messages like those: Play Wow. Yep, turns out that killing pixels on the screen is very therapeutic for anger.


----------



## NickSpalding (Apr 21, 2010)

Tossers. 

That is all.

Having read your original post, Julie...will you review my book, please?


----------



## Consuelo Saah Baehr (Aug 27, 2010)

Maybe this is not the time to ask, but I would love a review of "Daughters." from you.   And I can woman up and take it.  I once had such a bad review  I took to my bed and pulled down the shades but did not, repeat, did not, abuse the reviewer.  Mostly my reviews have been good and sometimes extraordinarily good.

Everyone knows writers can be big babies.  And it's okay to be a big baby in the privacy of your home. You can bawl all you want to in the bathroom.  But straighten up in public for god sakes.  And oh, about the formatting,   there is no excuse for that.  Smashwords puts out a very good guide to formatting and even though I am a sernior with limited clarity of thinking I was able to do it.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm glad I'm not a reviewer.

I agree with Red though. For the most part, you're preaching to the choir here and those who can't act professionally aren't going to hear your message and will probably get angry at being called out. 

I also agree with Camille about threads vilifying reviewers; I haven't really seen those. Authors have come here kvetching, but the advice has generally been: Take what you can of value, leave the rest, have some chocolate and write more.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

When I saw the title of the thread, I thought, 'oh no, someone else who has a thing against indie authors', (didn't know you were one too),but wow, after reading your post, I can't blame you for being angry. Very angry.  I would be too.

No words of advice, I just hope it won't turn you against doing reviews and the other things it sounds like you've been doing.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Just a warning:
> 
> Posting this here quite probably will not make those authors "see the error of their ways." You are possibly opening yourself up for yet more retaliation via e-mail, other forums, etc. Be prepared.
> 
> One thing I do when I get messages like those: Play Wow. Yep, turns out that killing pixels on the screen is very therapeutic for anger.


You're right. But I suspect Julie already knows this, given some of the horror stories she's shared dealing with folks of this bent...


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> Farrell, that's because it is never us. It is always someone else. Other people throw big fits at bad reviews, but _I'm_ the smart one. _I'd_ never do that. But then when the email arrives, and it is saying my work isn't good enough for review and there's all these errors, bam. The hurt starts. Anger. Who is this woman to say my work isn't even good enough to get a freaking review? Mind goes out the window, fingers start typing an email, and then it is all over.
> 
> No one is going to stand up here and say they treat reviewers like this. But when reading a thread like this, they might silently roll their eyes, or mutter about how the stupid person deserves it, or we're all just a bunch of politically correct whiners, or justify it by saying all that matters is sales, and if someone won't help, then f*** 'em. And yes, I've been given a message by someone who used to frequent these boards (no longer, thank god) who had that exact mentality. I kept the message. It was too classic to delete.
> 
> David Dalglish





foreverjuly said:


> +1 to this.
> 
> It's hard to know how you'd react if you haven't been put in that situation.
> 
> P.S. the fake review by another author on my book's page went poof this morning.


When I read things like that I have to start wondering.

I've had many a negative thing said about my writing and me personally by reviewers and even other writers. Still doesn't make me want to go emailing people with insults or threats or post fake reviews. It's not that hard. It takes a lot more energy to spew hate and angry comments at someone. I can understand someone being hurt or upset but I will never understand threatening a person or asking for their opinion and then saying who cares what you think because you don't agree with it.


----------



## JL Bryan (Aug 10, 2010)

"NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON’T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON’T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY BOOKS IF YOU CANT JUST READ THE STORY AND IGNORE A FEW TYPOS CAUSE PROFESSIONAL BOOKS HAVE TYPOS TOO AND I BET YOU DON’T BITCH ABOUT THEM."

Wow, I can only imagine how badly written that book was!

Sorry to hear this, Julie.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I'm sorry that happened, Julie. I think reviewers need to tell writers that their emails after the initial one, will be made public if need be. People like that shouldn't be able to hide.



daringnovelist said:


> Not sure I agree that we've had so many threads here vilifying reviewers though.


I think it's all a matter of perspective. Depending on your role, how you see yourself, your interpretation of posts might be different. A reviewer in a thread about reviewing is going to -- rightly or wrongly -- see different things than a writer or reader might. I usually come away from these threads not wanting to review indies -- and then I still occasionally do it. I don't see reviewers attacked, but there's often this feeling that reviewers are picking on people. Traditionally pubbed writers blow gaskets too, but a lot less often. It just seems ... dangerous ... to focus on indies. Like you have to ask yourself if you're feeling lucky, or at least okay with people thinking you're the puppy kicking type.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I believe every word of it.. and I know of at least 1 author (no longer on these boards, but was..) who sent me a request out of the blue to read their work, and when I told them I don't "do reveiews" I only review books I buy because I want to read them, I too got yelled at. Both messages were full of grammar & punctuation errors, and I had previously read a post here where the author stated they did not care about that "stuff" because what mattered was the story, so I knew I would never read their work. Even after telling this person, "No" in as polite a way as I could, and receiving their diatribe in response, guess what happened? They still linked me their Smashwords book listing and a coupon for the book.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Consuelo Saah Baehr said:


> Maybe this is not the time to ask, but I would love a review of "Daughters." from you. And I can woman up and take it. I once had such a bad review I took to my bed and pulled down the shades but did not, repeat, did not, abuse the reviewer. Mostly my reviews have been good and sometimes extraordinarily good.
> 
> Everyone knows writers can be big babies. And it's okay to be a big baby in the privacy of your home. You can bawl all you want to in the bathroom. But straighten up in public for god sakes.


The great thing about the internet is no one has to see your real reaction. You can call the reviewer names, you can tell whine to your friends about being misunderstood, you can go watch your favorite movie during which you will mutter "that @#!%*$" every ten minutes or so, you can take your dog for a major hike as you consider he's the only one in the whole world who really loves you, you can make a voodoo doll, and then ... you can sit down at your laptop and thank the reviewer for her time, consideration, whatever, and that you hope that in the future you write something that will please her more. Then, you hit send as you mutter, "Take that, you won't see me cry you, @#!%$!!! Then, you move on and hope to find actual perspective in time. If this all happens in public -- the review or rejection and your response -- you look like a professional and have just been very, very smart.

Really, I don't understand why people don't use the amazing bluffing abilities afforded us in the internet age.


----------



## Judi Coltman (Aug 23, 2010)

If an author is looking for a review, they must be prepared to accept the reviewers comments.  Simple.  The fact that you are doing this as a courtesy and are willing to actually promote work in your newsletter is a step beyond expectation.  What has happened to gratitude?  If someone doesn't care for my style or the entire work, that is the risk I take.  If someone is kind enough to point out mechanical problems and do it in private, I would be GRATEFUL!


----------



## luvmy4brats (Nov 9, 2008)

Sadly, this doesn't surprise me. I keep track of my books read on Goodreads and I star them based on how I feel about them. I usually don't write reviews, and use the stars just as a reminder to myself. I've actually had an author PM me and ask me to remove my rating because it was too low.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

I could use an honest review of my latest book too. I promise to be civilized about it.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

I'm with others when I say ... Wow ... just, wow!  I never realized people behaved this way.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

R. Reed said:


> I could use an honest review of my latest book too. I promise to be civilized about it.


The ideal thread to bring this up? LOL


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Julie,
> 
> I think I can honestly say that I feel your pain more than most. Truly, I deal with this kind of crap_ all the time_! I even did a post on "Authors Behaving Badly". I offset it with a post on "Authors Behaving Well" in hopes of showing some "good examples". The "crap" still continues, though.
> 
> ...


Lynn, I'm curious about something, though I don't know if you'd want to answer it here (or anywhere ). Roughly what percentage of your low-rated reviews generate harsh responses from authors?


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Hopefully, Julie, posting here was a good outlet for you. Some day, I promise, you will be laughing about this stuff.

To this day, my family and I still laugh about the author who called me a "cat lady."

I had one e-mail to tell me that the only reason my boyfriend bought me a Kindle is because I gave him a


Spoiler



Bjob


. All I could think of in response to that is that with the price of Kindles being almost $300 when my boyfriend bought it for me...well...at least I am good at something. 

Oh, and then there are quite a few who claim that I am just too stupid to understand their literary genius.

I should probably have been saving all those comments to use in a book someday. 

Seriously, when I get these people trying to post on my blog or sending me e-mails, I read them to my family for a good laugh. Then, I forward them privately to a select group of author buddies who get a good laugh, too.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

I'm convinced that not only is it a full moon, but Mercury is in retrograde.  We always blame poor Mercury when the were-idiots show their true colors.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I'm a Gemini, sun and moon both in Mercury (as I recall) and born under a full moon. Does this mean I'm insane?


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

It's really sad that people can act that way.  

You should require them to take a class before submitting to you.  "How to handle bad reviews or criticism 101."  It could be an internet course.  We probably could find someone who could set it up.  Just a series of questions and check mark the answers.  And if they check the box that says "I would threaten the reviewer" or "I would fire off an email that would really sting" then they fail the course and don't get to submit.  

Vicki


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Posting this here quite probably will not make those authors "see the error of their ways." You are possibly opening yourself up for yet more retaliation via e-mail, other forums, etc. Be prepared.


I don't expect anyone to change their ways. I know this. The way I see it, someone show up at my doorstep I got a big dog that is very protective of his mother and a big boyfriend more than capable of twisting someone into a pretzel. 

Besides, imagine what the press would do for book sales. 

Seriously though, my point was more to get people to take a step back and think about how they present themselves. David mentioned it earlier: It's always someone else. It's never us. But in the heat of the moment, when you decide to believe that a specific reviewer has an axe to grind with self-publishers or you convince yourself that a reviewer is being mean-spirited and trying to deliberately hurt your sales, do you hit the send button because YOU aren't being unprofessional, the reviewer is for not supporting you?

It is very much a matter of perspective.

For a while, I was in another forum where I went by a screen name that had nothing to do with my writing or publishing. It was an RPG forum, and I'd just go there to chat. But there were also writers there. One day a guy posted a rant about this reviewer who didn't "get" his book (it was an RPG product) with a link to the review. I had wrote the review under my real name. I had bought the product, didn't like it, and wrote a very lengthy review on it. But nobody knew it was me. I watched that thread go on five pages with everyone piling on about how dumb the reviewer was. "She probably doesn't even play RPGs" was a common statement. "Just ignore it it is only one person's opinion". And I watched the "helpful" votes plummet. Someone even went do far as to go find a picture of me and make comments about my social life.

When I finally came out and told people it was me, they all started to backtrack. "Oh, well, I can kind of see your point about..." But for five pages, the reviewer was automatically the bad guy, with everyone offering moral support to the writer blindly.

How many of us have offered that blind support?


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

scarlet said:


> I'm convinced that not only is it a full moon, but Mercury is in retrograde. We always blame poor Mercury when the were-idiots show their true colors.


Mercury is not currently retrograde. Venus is, though.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Classes won't help. Many writers think everything they write is golden and so they honestly mean a review should be honest. Honest about how they're a friggin' genius. They're giving permission to be told how wonderful they are and so anyone who disagrees is lying and, therefore, not giving them the honest review promised to them.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Lynn, I'm curious about something, though I don't know if you'd want to answer it here (or anywhere ). Roughly what percentage of your low-rated reviews generate harsh responses from authors?


It's hard to say, actually. When I first started reviewing, the authors were very open in their responses. The more popular I got in Indie circles, the more sneaky they tried to be.

After a one or two star review, I can usually guarantee that within 3 days I will get some random person trying to post nasty comments on my blog. Thank God for being able to moderate! 'Cause when I say "nasty", I mean they get really down and dirty.

Also, quite often, all of the "good reviews" on my Amazon page get voted down within a few days. Many of the reviews I post on Amazon get voted down, too.
There are comments made on forums, quite often under pseudonyms. Maybe I'm paranoid thinking they are authors, but I don't think so. The timing is just too coincidental.

I might also add that it's not only for reviews of one or two stars. There are many authors out there who get upset by a 3 star review. Less often, I upset authors with 4 Star reviews.

I make mistakes, too, though. Recently, an author posted a response to my review on their book. I got upset and responded back. Then, of course, they responded with even worse comments. I realized that I should never have responded in the first place, so I simply deleted my review and reposted it, which deleted all of the commentary. I guess they realized it wasn't a good idea, either, because they didn't repost their comments. Hopefully, we both learned something from that.


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

Victorine said:


> It's really sad that people can act that way.
> 
> You should require them to take a class before submitting to you. "How to handle bad reviews or criticism 101." It could be an internet course. We probably could find someone who could set it up. Just a series of questions and check mark the answers. And if they check the box that says "I would threaten the reviewer" or "I would fire off an email that would really sting" then they fail the course and don't get to submit.
> 
> Vicki


Irony of Ironies, I do have a Step by Step Guide to getting book reviews on my site. Even sample letters and how to deal with an abusive review! These are guidelines that will help a writer stay out of trouble just about anywhere.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> When I finally came out and told people it was me, they all started to backtrack. "Oh, well, I can kind of see your point about..." But for five pages, the reviewer was automatically the bad guy, with everyone offering moral support to the writer blindly.
> 
> How many of us have offered that blind support?


I actually had a similar thing happen, but it was even funnier.

Someone posted griping about my review of their book. They had received one star under the "Writing Style" category, for one thing. The author only posted the categories and their scores. (Just a note: I don't remember who it was and the author was not "mean" about it.)

The author got a bunch of "that's okays", etc. Then, someone said that the review must be from Red Adept. The author said it was. After that, a few people mentioned my name, but they still gave the author some 'props', which is as it should be. He was there for sympathy, and I had no problem with that.
Wth efunny part came when someone didn't read the entire thread. First, the person posted, quoting the previous post, that they liked my blog and enjoyed my reviews. Then, _in the same post_, said something like, "Who does that reviewer think they are? Who made them the expert on WRiting Style? You should just ignore that." The way it was worded made it obvious that they did not realize the OP was posting about a review from me. I laughed out loud at that one.


----------



## Michael Crane (Jul 22, 2010)

Wow... I am shocked.  

Pretty lame that people would behave that way.  Didn't sound like to me you were being overly harsh or anything.  Heck, you even went out of your way to help one of them out it sounds like.

*sigh*  Some people don't know how to act.


----------



## Sean Sweeney (Apr 17, 2010)

The scary thing is... I saw the second quote on Julie's original post and said to myself, "God, that typing looks sooo familiar."


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

While I hope threads like this will make some authors think before they react in any of the ways mentioned here, I confess to being pretty cynical about it. Human nature being what it is, the indie community is always going to be plagued with some percentage of people who do this. My guess is a lot of traditional authors are just as bad but because there are publishers and agents standing between them and the reviewer, they get stopped (and maybe even educated) before they can do as much damage. I don't know about others' experience, but I was in a critique group for several years and IME the worst writers were the most defensive and the least likely to take any suggestions for improvement.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Seriously, when I get these people trying to post on my blog or sending me e-mails, I read them to my family for a good laugh. Then, I forward them privately to a select group of author buddies who get a good laugh, too.


Huh. All I usually get in my blog comments are posts from this poor fellow from the Middle East. It seems his dad was deposed and assassinated, but all their money was safe because it was stored in this Swiss bank account. He's willing to let me withdraw it for him and I can keep 10 percent if I send him the rest...

I mean, we're talking MILLIONS here...

I'm gonna be rich. Forget Kindle... who needs book writing! I gots me ten percent of real Arabian riches coming my way!


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Michael Crane said:


> *sigh* Some people don't know how to act.


Like William Shatner?

(If Denny Crane is a relative, sorry...  )


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I think you should do a total tongue in cheek thing.  When they hit "submit" on your website, a box could appear saying, "I see you are trying to submit your book for review.  Thank you!  First, please take this simple test.  If you get a bad review, will you: 1. Shrug it off  2. Eat ice cream and pout for a while  3. Fire off an offensive email to me, threatening me or saying I'm stupid."

Then, if they answer 3, it can say, "I'm sorry, I think you answered the question wrong.  Please try again."

It might make them laugh, but in reality it might make them think twice about responding in the heat of the moment when they do get a less than stellar response.  

Vicki


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Yet some people are smart-Alex Trebecks, Vicki... They might choose option 3 just because... LOL

There's no cure for stupid. I think it was one of those Blue Collar Comedy Tour guys. Or Joe Biden's doctor. Or George W. Bush's.... (gotta cover all bases to keep the peace...)


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Thank you for posting this, Julie, and for posting the other useful links on your site.  Honestly, I wonder if any of these three writers tried the traditional route of trying to get published?  Once you've gotten a few generic rejection slips or no response at all from literary agents and publishers, having a person take the time to read your work and respond thoughtfully is a great gift, even if you don't agree with what person is telling you.  Especially when that person takes the time to send you a private message about it!  I don't know of many reviewers who offer that luxury, so kudos to you for doing so.

I'm a pretty sensitive person and cringe even when I read good reviews/critiques, but I've learned to just get over myself and try to listen to what the other person is telling me.  The ability to discern good feedback and use it in a way that fits your unique style and improves your writing is a talent I could cultivate more than I do.  It's one of the best ways, along with lots of practice, to become a good writer.


----------



## Maria Hooley (Jul 21, 2009)

Julie,

With a little modification, one of my favorite Heinlein quotes would definitely work in this situation:  "You live and learn or you don't live long."  If you apply this to writing, it would go something like You write and learn to act professionally or you don't write long (at least with an audience to read you).


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Like William Shatner?
> 
> (If Denny Crane is a relative, sorry...  )


Speaking of Shatner - he's a class act, from what I've seen. Though this is just priceless:


----------



## Jon King (Sep 10, 2010)

This thread is actually pretty helpful to me.  I'm just getting into the reviewing game (well, stumbling into it, I suppose), and so far I've had great luck with the indie authors I've chosen to review.  There are going to be books that I have serious issues with, and I hope when the time comes I have the integrity to not pull punches.  Most of the authorly feedback I've gotten has suggested that is what they WANT to hear, since all of it is helpful feedback.  But I think it would be worthwhile for me to state that up front like Julie does, just in case something like this happens.

And I agree, if a book is rife with typos, some step was missing in the process that should occur before being sent out for review, and DEFINITELY before being put on the market.  

Thanks, Julie, for giving a rank amateur reveiwer a pro warning.


----------



## Dawn McCullough White (Feb 24, 2010)

I wonder how many requests to review books you'll be receiving now that everyone knows you review books?  Btw. you'll be receiving email from me in the near future.  

Dawn


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

Dawn McCullough White said:


> I wonder how many requests to review books you'll be receiving now that everyone knows you review books? Btw. you'll be receiving email from me in the near future.
> 
> Dawn


I don't know. I might have scared some people away... 

But this is the link that explains my book reviews (free), as well as anyone interested in offering a sample chapter for the newsletter (free) and my fee based stuff (such as advertising in the Quarterly, press release service, and consulting.) I think I make things clear as crystal.

http://www.bardsandsages.com/positivepublishing/authorservices.html


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

William Shatner once said "No" to me. I asked if I could take his picture. So I didn't take it.


----------



## Travis haselton (Jul 24, 2010)

NickSpalding said:


> Tossers.
> 
> That is all.
> 
> Having read your original post, Julie...will you review my book, please?


I was thinking about asking that to. But I am going to wait until the whole series is finished and on one edition before I send it through a large amount of promoting.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

R. Reed said:


> William Shatner once said "No" to me. I asked if I could take his picture. So I didn't take it.


Lou Ferrigno once said no to me when I asked if I could take his picture. Then I explained I was there as a member of the press, so he huddled with his agent and they gave me the go ahead. Putz. I was giving him free publicity and he wanted cash for a photo.

Of course I am grateful he didn't simply say, "Hulk SMASH!" and beat me in the head.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

I'm watching this thread on breaks from work today, and I'm just dumbfounded.

Authors, if you "aren't in it for the money" -- or whatever other excuse you want to use to justify not putting out a professional product -- then how can you possibly expect other people to waste their time on you?

Inflict your precious tome on your family and friends, but sheesh! don't demand that people who are "in it for the money" stop what they're doing to adore you as if you were still in the high chair lining up three peas in a row.

Frankly, whenever someone says they aren't in it for the money or they can't afford to hire a proof reader or editor, that person's work goes in the NTR pile (never to read).

I don't have time for something that someone else didn't respect me enough to make the best they could before giving it to me.

Finally, a review or a critique is like gold. If any person has taken their time to 1, read your work, 2, think about what they've read, 3, give you a thoughtful analysis or comment, then the proper response is THANK YOU!

What you do with their comments is your affair, but the response remains the same: Thank you.


----------



## 13500 (Apr 22, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> I'm watching this thread on breaks from work today, and I'm just dumbfounded.
> 
> Authors, if you "aren't in it for the money" -- or whatever other excuse you want to use to justify not putting out a professional product -- then how can you possibly expect other people to waste their time on you?
> 
> ...


Amen!


----------



## kcmay (Jul 14, 2010)

Mark Asher said:


> Lou Ferrigno once said no to me when I asked if I could take his picture. Then I explained I was there as a member of the press, so he huddled with his agent and they gave me the go ahead. Putz. I was giving him free publicity and he wanted cash for a photo.
> 
> Of course I am grateful he didn't simply say, "Hulk SMASH!" and beat me in the head.


I was volunteering at the Phoenix Rescue Mission, preparing food for the homeless, and some of the Arizona Cardinals players were there to serve the food. Kurt Warner walked through the kitchen to wash his hands, and on his way back, I asked if we could get a pic with him. He said sure.  So my friends and I all got to pose for a pic with our favorite QB.


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

Not to be contrary, but there's a piece of advice I was given by web designer friend that I think worth mentioning: "If pettiness on the internet makes you mad, don't get on the internet."  

AND... Let me go on record as saying that, yes, I write books for money. Does that make me in it for the money? Of course. Publishing and proof reading suck. If I wasn't in it for the money, I wouldn't do either. I'm not a fool. I'd write fan fiction for my friends and have fun. Does that seem a bit obvious to anyone else? Why doesn't this go without saying? What ennobles the writing profession, like most creative professions, is that there is not a lot of money to be made and people who have been doing what you want to do are making most of it already AND YET a passionate lot still try to break in. You have to love writing to be an author, but why wouldn't you want to get paid? Because you're above it? Are you then too artistic to eat, drink, and crave warmth when it is cold?


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

kcmay said:


> I was volunteering at the Phoenix Rescue Mission, preparing food for the homeless, and some of the Arizona Cardinals players were there to serve the food. Kurt Warner walked through the kitchen to wash his hands, and on his way back, I asked if we could get a pic with him. He said sure.  So my friends and I all got to pose for a pic with our favorite QB.


*is jealous*


----------



## horse_girl (Apr 9, 2010)

There *are* malicious reviewers out there too. You must admit that there are those out to put down writers for one reason or another. Granted, professional reviewers are one thing, but I'm talking the flip side of the coin.

My only 1 star review is by someone who has never done anything else on Amazon before or since, at least according to their profile, which is incomplete. I've heard of this happening to other writers too. Not all reviews are honestly to help other readers but are there just to be vindictive. I'll never respond to that review. It's there but hasn't hurt sales.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

kcmay said:


> I was volunteering at the Phoenix Rescue Mission, preparing food for the homeless, and some of the Arizona Cardinals players were there to serve the food. Kurt Warner walked through the kitchen to wash his hands, and on his way back, I asked if we could get a pic with him. He said sure.  So my friends and I all got to pose for a pic with our favorite QB.


I live in St. Louis and we love Warner here. There are lots of stories about his generosity. Good guy.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Some reviewers are just mean, but I think that usually shows. You're right that sometimes there's no real response. Although, if you publicly kill someone with kindness it does mess up their day.


----------



## kcmay (Jul 14, 2010)

Mark Asher said:


> I live in St. Louis and we love Warner here. There are lots of stories about his generosity. Good guy.


Not to derail the thread, but have you read his book, First Things First? I have it on my Kindle. Great stuff.


----------



## Cliff Ball (Apr 10, 2010)

horse_girl said:


> There *are* malicious reviewers out there too. You must admit that there are those out to put down writers for one reason or another. Granted, professional reviewers are one thing, but I'm talking the flip side of the coin.
> 
> My only 1 star review is by someone who has never done anything else on Amazon before or since, at least according to their profile, which is incomplete. I've heard of this happening to other writers too. Not all reviews are honestly to help other readers but are there just to be vindictive. I'll never respond to that review. It's there but hasn't hurt sales.


I've had that happen too. My first novel, Out of Time, has a 1 star review from someone who didn't review anything else for the last 2 1/2 years, and I don't know if I should ask Amazon to remove it or let it stay.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

As long as bad reviews are being mentioned, I'll mention something I find objectionable -- authors swapping good reviews. I realize that they may genuinely like one another's work, but I've seen some where they make it a point to write a generic review for every book a writer has and repost the same review for each book. It's wrong. As a reader, I take reviews as recommendations about how to spend my money, so I don't want some one-hand-washing-the-other review. 

Writers who actually try to write real reviews don't always hand out 4- and 5-star reviews. It's not uncommon for a writer to take another writer to task over a poor effort.


----------



## 4dprefect (Oct 18, 2010)

derekprior said:


> I think the only difference between indie publishing and mainstream is (or should be) that indies don't have to sit at the bottom of a slush pile to be read. We decide what to put before the public and we are in control of quality. If we can't be bothered to re-draft and edit (and better still, have our work edited) we have to be prepared to take the flack.
> 
> I think it is a great courtesy to inform the writer privately that you are unable to give a positive review. The general public probably won't be so kind.
> 
> I've raised this issue in another thread -- should I refuse to review something I thought was really bad? The unanimous response was to review anyway. Unfortunately, bad reviews tend to become full-blown critiques (I don't like to say something's bad; I prefer to explain what didn't work for me). Then you get the criticism that reviews are not critiques. It's a hard one to win.


Well said, sir. I mean, well said pretty much everyone on this thread. But this (very salient) point about authors being their own quality controllers is worth echoing.

As a newbie here, I hadn't realised this was a site where a lot of critiquing/reviewing went on, but yes, if you find you can't give a positive review, then it's a generous courtesy to notify the author in question and not one they'd get if they submitted their book to a magazine for review, I'd imagine.

SAF


----------



## Guest (Oct 21, 2010)

Cliff Ball said:


> I've had that happen too. My first novel, Out of Time, has a 1 star review from someone who didn't review anything else for the last 2 1/2 years, and I don't know if I should ask Amazon to remove it or let it stay.


I went and checked that review out. That's a bummer it's the only review for the book at all. It sounds like it's a legit review even if the reader isn't the best writer. If you wanted to try to revive it, I would hand out some free copies and try to get some other reviews. Even though he only gave it one star, I can't say he totally turned me off to the book. I could easily feel differently about the things he didn't like.


----------



## horse_girl (Apr 9, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> Some reviewers are just mean, but I think that usually shows. You're right that sometimes there's no real response. Although, if you publicly kill someone with kindness it does mess up their day.


That's almost too fun to do sometimes. Your tongue may bleed from biting it, but the payoff comes from p'ing them off by not taking their bait.


----------



## Cliff Ball (Apr 10, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> I went and checked that review out. That's a bummer it's the only review for the book at all. It sounds like it's a legit review even if the reader isn't the best writer. If you wanted to try to revive it, I would hand out some free copies and try to get some other reviews. Even though he only gave it one star, I can't say he totally turned me off to the book. I could easily feel differently about the things he didn't like.


Since then, I fixed a couple things with the novel, which is why I have it done as 2nd edition, which I just did last week. I asked amazon to leave the review with the old paperback, but so far... nada.


----------



## Alice Y. Yeh (Jul 14, 2010)

horse_girl said:


> There *are* malicious reviewers out there too. You must admit that there are those out to put down writers for one reason or another. Granted, professional reviewers are one thing, but I'm talking the flip side of the coin.
> 
> My only 1 star review is by someone who has never done anything else on Amazon before or since, at least according to their profile, which is incomplete. I've heard of this happening to other writers too. Not all reviews are honestly to help other readers but are there just to be vindictive. I'll never respond to that review. It's there but hasn't hurt sales.


Well right. If you're submitting something for review, though, then it's up to you to look at what the person has posted thus far to get a feel for how he/she operates. (Not referring to you specifically, just authors in general.) If the reviewer seems to thrive on ripping authors apart, then close the browser window and move on. If the reviewer isn't someone whom you contacted . . . well, not much you can do about that.

Sorry that this happened to you, Julie. I've read some of your reviews, and they're honest and fair. No reason to receive nasty e-mails


----------



## David Greene (Oct 16, 2010)

Everyone who publishes their writing takes a risk.  This is true for both writers and reviewers.  Self-confidence levels vary widely--and with it the ability to handle criticisms.  It sounds like the writers you encountered had low self-confidence.  Of course most of us are not free from self-doubt.  I certainly didn't have a thick skin when I was younger.  It takes time and experience to learn how to handle criticism.  

Writers have to grow thick skin--and reviewers do as well.  But it can be painful to get there.  I feel compassion for all sides of this:  the insecure writer, the disrespected reviewer.  Writers, reviewers and readers--we all share a passion for books.    The revolution in publishing means that we are part of the first wave of people learning how to handle these new environments.  It seems inevitable that there will continue to be writers who are insecure and behave in an immature way.  So I imagine that with time, communities like this will collectively nod their heads when such immaturities arise and think "newbie" or "young writer."  

To the insecure writers, I want to say: "Don't worry.  You'll get used to criticism eventually.  You'll learn not to confuse it with self-worth.  You may even learn to look for gifts in the criticism."  But I also want to say to them, "don't be discouraged" and "don't give up on writing."

To disrespected reviewers, I say the same, "don't be discouraged" and "don't give up on reviewing" because we surely all need each other.

And we must all practice mutual respect to share our passion for books.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

You know, I'm really glad Julie posted this.  I agree with Red that it could lead to more grief for her, but....

We've got to start calling out bad behavior when we see it.  In some circumstances (like this one) we can't and shouldn't call out the individuals, but we do have to call out the behavior.  These people may never _change_ but they (and others like them) begin to learn that they don't get points and they don't get sympathy for throwing a fit. 

People may feel morally entitled to do this sort of thing, but they do it a lot more when they think it's socially acceptable.  Threads like this make it clear that it is NOT acceptable.

Camille


----------



## Steve Silkin (Sep 15, 2010)

DavidGreene said:


> Writers have to grow thick skin--and reviewers do as well.


The messages that were described in the original post went way over the border of the need for 'thick skin' and at one point approached the territory of the need for a restraining order.


----------



## 4dprefect (Oct 18, 2010)

There was a lot of this kind of stuff on authonomy, but it was out in the open, on the forum. In that environment, I think people were being bitchy as much to make a name for themselves, grab some attention, as much as anything else. I will say though that on that forum, a post like the one that started this thread would have invited a lot of internet thugs to come and pounce on you. Never paid to champion a good cause on that forum.

From what I've read here so far, that says something for these boards and the people on them.


SAF


----------



## Gordon Ryan (Aug 20, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I have been insulted more and called more names since I have become a reviewer than over the course of *my entire 41 years * added together.


My goodness, Red, you really _are _ an honest reviewer, aren't you? Shocking!!!

Gordon Ryan


----------



## D.A. Boulter (Jun 11, 2010)

I felt very insulted by the subject line. My first thought: I'm finished growing up; now I'm merely growing out . . . unfortunately. Like the poet, Robert Service, I'm 'Fighting the Battle of the Bulge'.

Just count me on board with everyone else. No need for that type of nastiness. In fact, there is no _room_ for that type of nastiness in this profession.


----------



## Gordon Ryan (Aug 20, 2010)

Unfortunately, this kind of behavior is more common that we would like to believe and it is not limited to book reviewers, or the internet.  After thirty years as a city manager and general manager of large HOA's (homeowner associations or gated communities) I can tell you that people are very irate when they can't get their own way.  Very few are considerate and accepting of rejection in any form.

After all, doesn't everyone watch the American Idol auditions?  All those great singers who are not recognized by Simon et al?  How could they miss such talent?

Julie, Red, more power to you as you try to walk this road.  I have given some advice, privately, behind the scenes, either email or PM on KB, but so far it was accepted as offered: with courtesy.  You have offered your comment in public and many simply cannot accept that level of rejection.

So, back to watching AI reruns!!!  And for what it's worth, my mother would be the LAST person to whom I would send my book for a review.  She wasn't happy with anything I did, so books would be no different.  In that regard, I have been fully prepped for a reviewer to rate my work.    

Gordon Ryan


----------



## Joyce DeBacco (Apr 24, 2010)

I couldn't let this thread fade away without saying, "Unbelievable!" Some people go through life thinking whatever irks them is someone else's fault. I wonder about their personal relationships. Are family and friends hesitant to cross them?

Joyce


----------



## Dawn Judd (Jun 8, 2010)

Victorine said:


> I think you should do a total tongue in cheek thing. When they hit "submit" on your website, a box could appear saying, "I see you are trying to submit your book for review. Thank you! First, please take this simple test. If you get a bad review, will you: 1. Shrug it off 2. Eat ice cream and pout for a while 3. Fire off an offensive email to me, threatening me or saying I'm stupid."
> 
> Then, if they answer 3, it can say, "I'm sorry, I think you answered the question wrong. Please try again."
> 
> ...


I love that. Now how to incorporate it. Hmmmm.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

kcmay said:


> I agree with you, Julie. If we want others to take us seriously, we have to act professionally to both readers and other professionals in the field of books and publishing. If we just want to sell our books to friends and family and not make money, then we need to understand that we'll still be expected to conduct ourselves respectfully and respectably.


I agree with this statement. To be treated with respect, we must all be professionals. I've been extremely impressed, over the last two months since I've been on KB, at how professional, friendly, kind and open the forum participants seem. We all make bad choices at times. I hope that's all this was--a bad choice--rather than malicious intent.

I'm very sorry, Julie, that you've been treated this poorly. I just want to reiterate what I've said before: I appreciate reviewers. It's a tough job and, apparently, can be quite thankless. Reviewers, like you, provide a valuable service to readers and writers.


----------



## RJ Keller (Mar 9, 2009)

Julie,
Wow! And I thought I'd had a bad day at work. 

Just wanted to post my wholehearted agreement as well as a link to a blog post of mine from July. We all (I include myself in the "all") really need to step up our game and do our best to present ourselves as professionals if we want to be treated with respect.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

jbh13md said:


> You have to love writing to be an author, but why wouldn't you want to get paid? Because you're above it? Are you then too artistic to eat, drink, and crave warmth when it is cold?


This is great--I want to put this quote on tee-shirt and wear it to this critique group I don't attend anymore because they were too "artistic" for me.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

purplepen79 said:


> This is great--I want to put this quote on tee-shirt and wear it to this critique group I don't attend anymore because they were too "artistic" for me.


Yeah. The thing to remember is that very often the motivation for people who sneer at payment is fear. (Actually, this is true of people who sneer generally.)

Fear of failure is such a strong motivator and it makes people so crazy. And one of the best ways to avoid failure is to never try. But if that makes you feel cowardly, you have to cover your tracks by pretending that you are somehow above trying, and above failure too.

Camille


----------



## Michael R. Hicks (Oct 29, 2008)

I would say, "Unbelievable," but as others have pointed out, it's all too believable, and quite sad. However, as I commented to Red on her thread recounting similar silliness from immature authors, and to paraphrase Mr. T (for those old enough to remember him!), "I pity da fool!" They're not hurting anyone but themselves.

And yes, let's be honest: getting critical feedback on one's work can be a bit uncomfortable. But many of us take that and use it to try and make our work better and more enjoyable for the readers - if we don't get feedback telling us where we're weak, how can we improve? 

But if somebody just wants an ego trip, they really need to find something else to do. Or just bother publishing whatever it is they write!


----------



## Learnmegood (Jun 20, 2009)

In that guy's defense, Julie, some of us really DON'T do it for the money...

We do it for the power, the fame, and the promise of all-you-can-eat waffles at the local IHOP.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Learnmegood said:


> In that guy's defense, Julie, some of us really DON'T do it for the money...
> 
> We do it for the power, the fame, and the promise of all-you-can-eat waffles at the local IHOP.


(whispering) How'd you find out my secret?! Why else do you think I mention the IHOP in my book!? (even lower) and the Denny's...(Ducks and hides)


----------



## Gordon Ryan (Aug 20, 2010)

Learnmegood said:


> We do it for the power, the fame, and the promise of all-you-can-eat waffles at the local IHOP.


Hey, when did we get _that _ option Nobody told me!!

Gordon Ryan


----------



## Dawn Judd (Jun 8, 2010)

Learnmegood said:


> In that guy's defense, Julie, some of us really DON'T do it for the money...
> 
> We do it for the power, the fame, and the promise of all-you-can-eat waffles at the local IHOP.


Nooooo. Let me go take my book down. I don't want IHOP. Waffle House? Then maybe we can talk.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Notice how no one's using the Bruce Springsteen reason...

"I (write novels) to meet chicks!"

(He said play in a band, originally, but otherwise the quote is accurate.)


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Would all you big city people with your high-falutin' pancake chains have mercy on the people who live in the middle of nowhere?


----------



## Learnmegood (Jun 20, 2009)

Gordon Ryan said:


> Hey, when did we get _that _ option Nobody told me!!
> 
> Gordon Ryan


Gordon, my point exactly. YOU chose to do it for the money. You've made your bed, now lie in it. And jealously dream of me and my syrup.


----------



## Dawn Judd (Jun 8, 2010)

If it makes you feel better, I don't even have the aforementioned waffle house.  I have to drive 3 hours to eat there.  But it beats the IHOP we have here.  Trust me, all you IHOP lovers would convert if you ate at this one.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

From what I understand... Portland, OR's VOODOO DOUGHNUT has 'em all beat!


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2010)

Years ago, before I launched Bards and Sages, I sent my campaign setting off to a potential publisher for submission.  I got a three page e-mail back from him that began "I'm not going to tell you what you are doing right.  You already know that.  I'm going to tell you everything you are doing wrong."  And then he proceeded to spend the rest of the e-mail ripping my book apart.  I screamed after reading it.  And in my head I ran through a million excuses why he was wrong.  And then it hit me:  this publisher just spent who the hell knows how long writing a three page critique for me when he could have sent me a form letter.  That was the single most important response I ever got to a submission, because up until that point I had a relatively easy time of it.  I had publishing credits (paid...gasp!) and awards under my belt already, and the rejections I had gotten were simple form letters.  Everyone always told me about the good stuff I was doing, but nobody had ever told me what I was doing wrong.

I had a chance to talk to that publisher at a later date and asked him why he only wrote the negative stuff, because it might have been nice to hear what I was doing right.     His response was "you would have ignored everything wrong then."  His point was we tend to hear what we want to hear and read what we want to read.  So he eliminated the distractions and focused on what I needed to fix so I WOULD FOCUS ON IT.  


I told myself then that I wanted to be THAT publisher for other writers.  Because what he did for me was so important to my growth.  It is very easy to find cheerleaders in this industry.  It is much harder to find drill seargants.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Dawn Judd said:


> If it makes you feel better, I don't even have the aforementioned waffle house. I have to drive 3 hours to eat there. But it beats the IHOP we have here. Trust me, all you IHOP lovers would convert if you ate at this one.


Me and my characters always get into trouble at the Waffle House. The two go hand in hand but the food is so good especially at 3am in the morning.

As for the post about Lou Ferigno, charging for autographs is actually a source of income for him. I've met him a few times at conventions and he's a nice guy but he is there to make money. Think about someone coming up to you and asking for a free copy of your book while other people are at the same event paying for them. The person would have to be really cool, a friend or a reviewer for that to happen.

Okay, back on topic now. My knee jerk reaction was to take offense at the title of this thread. The vast majority of authors here don't need to grow up and I remember a few times you came down on people for hosting "pity parties". This isn't much different.

I don't have anyting new to add. Like everyone else, I'm sorry you got those kinds of replies. They shouldn't happen but they do. Anyone who puts their work out there for public consumption needs to have a relatively thick skin. Everytime I send out something to be reviewed or critiqued, I always worry about whether someone will like it or not. I don't assume or take it for granted that everyone everywhere will like my stuff or want to read it.


----------



## Brenda Carroll (May 21, 2009)

Why be angry with ignorance? I've seen ignorance you people wouldn't believe. In the cosmic sense, it really doesn't matter, does it?






"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain." Blade Runner.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Years ago, before I launched Bards and Sages, I sent my campaign setting off to a potential publisher for submission. I got a three page e-mail back from him that began "I'm not going to tell you what you are doing right. You already know that. I'm going to tell you everything you are doing wrong." And then he proceeded to spend the rest of the e-mail ripping my book apart. I screamed after reading it. And in my head I ran through a million excuses why he was wrong. And then it hit me: this publisher just spent who the hell knows how long writing a three page critique for me when he could have sent me a form letter. That was the single most important response I ever got to a submission, because up until that point I had a relatively easy time of it. I had publishing credits (paid...gasp!) and awards under my belt already, and the rejections I had gotten were simple form letters. Everyone always told me about the good stuff I was doing, but nobody had ever told me what I was doing wrong.
> 
> I had a chance to talk to that publisher at a later date and asked him why he only wrote the negative stuff, because it might have been nice to hear what I was doing right.  His response was "you would have ignored everything wrong then." His point was we tend to hear what we want to hear and read what we want to read. So he eliminated the distractions and focused on what I needed to fix so I WOULD FOCUS ON IT.
> 
> I told myself then that I wanted to be THAT publisher for other writers. Because what he did for me was so important to my growth. It is very easy to find cheerleaders in this industry. It is much harder to find drill seargants.


Cool story. Who was that?


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

ellenoc said:


> the worst writers were the most defensive and the least likely to take any suggestions for improvement.


Dunning-Kruger syndrome strikes again!

I had two reviewers in a row turn down my book for review. That certainly didn't feel good. But I didn't get upset at them about it; I'm trying my best to act like the professional I hope one day to be. On the up-side, they were both men, so...maybe I'm a women's fantasy fiction author? The vast majority of my readers (that I know of) are women. I'm waiting on a review from a woman; maybe that will help me with some new tags for my book.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Haven't read the entire thread, and while I sympathise with you, this type of thing is going to happen. If you offer a service to the public, all of the public will respond and sadly, not everyone is nice, or polite, or even civil. 

Some folk are going to get annoyed with you regardless of what you do. Getting annoyed with them is not worth the aggravation. People will complain for all sorts of reasons, and many complaints aren't even rational.

I ran an gaming Internet cafe a few years ago and, surprisingly, it wasn't the kids that were a problem. It was ignorant people who blamed me for things that were beyond my control. I lost count of the number of times people swore at me because Hotmail was down, or realestate.com was slow. My personal favourite were the idiots who would complain when a Youtube video they had seen at some other cafe had been removed by the user. You would not believe how common this was, and how many people blamed me for the 'This video is no longer available' tag. I learned to smile, nod, and insist they pay for their time even if they tried to wriggle out of it.


----------



## Michael R. Hicks (Oct 29, 2008)

MichelleR said:


> Would all you big city people with your high-falutin' pancake chains have mercy on the people who live in the middle of nowhere?


Come over to my place - I make better pancakes than IHOP ever could!


----------



## Michael Crane (Jul 22, 2010)

♫ I don't wanna grow up / I'm a Toys-R-Us kid... ♫

Ahem... sorry.  Kinda got carried away there for a second.  I'm back.


----------



## theaatkinson (Sep 22, 2010)

Joyce DeBacco said:


> I couldn't let this thread fade away without saying, "Unbelievable!" Some people go through life thinking whatever irks them is someone else's fault. I wonder about their personal relationships. Are family and friends hesitant to cross them?
> 
> Joyce


grrrr. I agree, Joyce! happens all the time!


----------



## traceya (Apr 26, 2010)

I've read through this entire thread with disappointment but unfortunately, not surprise. I've even blogged about it a couple of times on Goodreads if anyone cares to check it out - http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/4076601.Tracey_Alley/blog

Very early in the piece, just after the release date I asked Julie to review Erich's Plea. She wrote back to me a VERY polite, private email explaining the reasons she couldn't review the book. I looked at her comments, went back and took another look at the MS and she was right, fair and honest. I implemented many of her suggestions and I believe that since then I've come up with a MUCH better book because of it, with a couple of decent reviews now under my belt to support that feeling.

I'm not saying that to pat myself on the back or even to show Julie in a good light. I'm using myself as an example of the way ALL authors should be behaving towards criticism. Sure some 1 star reviews and criticisms can be shrugged off but 9 times out of 10 I wouldn't be surprised if the reviewer giving out a bad review doesn't have a good and valid reasons - reasons the author should take seriously.

Maybe if there were a place where these childish authors could be named and shamed they might think twice about sending offensive, abusive and threatening emails. Why should we protect, by our silence, those Indie authors who are giving the whole industry a bad name? All of our actions have consequences, maybe these poorly behaved writers need to feel the consequences of their actions.

This is, of course, just my opinion and I'll prepare myself for the hate mail


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

traceya said:


> Maybe if there were a place where these childish authors could be named and shamed they might think twice about sending offensive, abusive and threatening emails. Why should we protect, by our silence, those Indie authors who are giving the whole industry a bad name?


I agree, Tracey, but I think the reason it's not done, generally, is that... we live in a VERY litigious society.

I mean... a woman can go through a McDonald's drive-thru, put a hot cup of coffee between her own legs, by her own choice, spill said hot coffee on herself, and then successfully sue McDonald's for millions because the coffee was ... hot!

If some idiot can get away with that... what's to prevent said hot-head authors from suing everybody and their cousin if they are "unmasked" as impatient and foul-mouthed jerks... on a forum, blog, or Web site? Defamation of character, libel, slander, a littany of charges... and even if the truth is on your side, that doesn't mean some jury won't find you "responsible."

So we all end up living in fear of being sued. Because if McDonald's can be held responsible for some woman's careless actions, then who's safe? And such abusive behavior tends to remain anonymous as a result of the tyranny of potential litigation.

Tragic, sad, and not right... but likely the main reason...


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I think that while people shouldn't publicly be named that reviewers should share this info. Of course, that's somewhat selfish on my part.


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

traceya said:


> Maybe if there were a place where these childish authors could be named and shamed they might think twice about sending offensive, abusive and threatening emails. Why should we protect, by our silence, those Indie authors who are giving the whole industry a bad name? All of our actions have consequences, maybe these poorly behaved writers need to feel the consequences of their actions.


Rather than a Wall of Shame, wouldn't it be better if OTHER writers called out the bad behavior? I think we all crave the approval of our peers, and behavior like this doesn't exist in a vacuum. So the next time a thread pops up on here, or Amazon, or Goodreads... wherever, from a writer who is raging or ridiculing a reviewer, are other writers going to participate in a pile-on, or are they going to stand up and say "That's not professional. Knock it off."

I'm not sure why so many are surprised that there are KB writers who are behaving this way. Ironically, it's how I found this board. And some of the people who claim they would never do such a thing, HAVE done such a thing.

I'm very impressed that people like Julie and Red continue to review indies, and give honest feedback. It must truly be a labor of love. I'm not sure who it was on this thread, but someone pointed out that it's always the other guy, but sometimes it's not.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

StaceyHH said:


> Rather than a Wall of Shame, wouldn't it be better if OTHER writers called out the bad behavior? I think we all crave the approval of our peers, and behavior like this doesn't exist in a vacuum. So the next time a thread pops up on here, or Amazon, or Goodreads... wherever, from a writer who is raging or ridiculing a reviewer, are other writers going to participate in a pile-on, or are they going to stand up and say "That's not professional. Knock it off."
> 
> I'm not sure why so many are surprised that there are KB writers who are behaving this way. Ironically, it's how I found this board. And some of the people who claim they would never do such a thing, HAVE done such a thing.
> 
> I'm very impressed that people like Julie and Red continue to review indies, and give honest feedback. It must truly be a labor of love. I'm not sure who it was on this thread, but someone pointed out that it's always the other guy, but sometimes it's not.


I think this sort of calling out is very easy to do privately, whenever we encounter it. Doing it publicly is what inspires the "fear of being sued."

Of course, anyone who's not of that temperament would say that ought not be a fear, the truth is the truth. But anyone of that temperament to begin with? Probably isn't a reasonable enough person to agree and therefore you get that fear of litigation when doing such things publicly.

I mean, if they were reasonable to begin with, there'd be no issue in the first place, right? They'd accept feedback in the spirit intended, and either pull their piece from consideration or revise it and re-submit without all the hullabaloo.

 ...I've always wanted to have an opportunity to use the word hullabaloo...


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I mean... a woman can go through a McDonald's drive-thru, put a hot cup of coffee between her own legs, by her own choice, spill said hot coffee on herself, and then successfully sue McDonald's for millions because the coffee was ... hot!


For clarification because this case is so misunderstood:

The woman did NOT sue McDonalds because the coffee was hot. She sued because the cups were defective. Yes, she put the coffee between her legs, but she didn't "spill it." The bottom of the cup melted off.

During discovery, her attorney even obtained e-mails where the managers of more than one McDonalds stores had complained that the cups were defective, i.e. the coffee was melting them until the bottoms fell off.

I don't think this was a frivolous case at all. The cup happened to be between her legs. HOwever, had she been taking a drink of the coffee when the bottom fell out, it would have burned her chest or other body parts.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Is your other job being a much more charming version of Nancy Grace?


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I think this sort of calling out is very easy to do privately, whenever we encounter it. Doing it publicly is what inspires the "fear of being sued."


I can totally see how a person could be sued for listing names in a Wall of Shame format, but how, in public, when a writer is Behaving Badly, would another writer telling them it's unprofessional/unacceptable behavior be cause for a lawsuit? Yeah, one could be seen as defamation, while the other is a direct response, in the spirit of peer review. I'm probably missing part of the big picture here.


----------



## Dawn Judd (Jun 8, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> For clarification because this case is so misunderstood:
> 
> The woman did NOT sue McDonalds because the coffee was hot. She sued because the cups were defective. Yes, she put the coffee between her legs, but she didn't "spill it." The bottom of the cup melted off.
> 
> ...


Where did you read that? Everything I've read said it spilled on her when she took the lid off. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Red,

All that was after the woman got attorneys involved. And she's still the one who put the coffee between her legs instead of in a proper beverage holder. Had she done that, she wouldn't have been burned at all.

I mean... a whole episode of SEINFELD was dedicated to this case... SEINFELD can't be wrong, right?  LOL


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

MichelleR said:


> Is your other job being a much more charming version of Nancy Grace?


   

First, I had to look up who "Nancy Grace" was...  

Nope, I just hate it that people keep citing this case as a "frivolous lawsuit." People are welcome to think it was frivilous, but they should at least think so based on the actual facts.

I agree that there are TONS of stupid, frivolous lawsuits out there, though. I just don't think this is one of them.

My bf & I went to a Ruby Tuesdays awhile ago. We ordered iced tea. When my bf picked his up to take a drink, the bottom fell off of the glass; he was wearing the entire glass of tea. we weren't all that upset until the manager came over to apologize, then said, "I'm sorry, this happens all the time with these glasses. We are going to replace them eventually." What if that had been hot liquid? Geezzz... No, we didn't "sue." There was no real damage done. But, if he had burned himself, we very well might have. Also, we will never go to Ruby Tuesday's again.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

StaceyHH said:


> I can totally see how a person could be sued for listing names in a Wall of Shame format, but how, in public, when a writer is Behaving Badly, would another writer telling them it's unprofessional/unacceptable behavior be cause for a lawsuit? Yeah, one could be seen as defamation, while the other is a direct response, in the spirit of peer review. I'm probably missing part of the big picture here.


I think Craig is still talking the Wall of Shame idea based on discussing private correspondences and not telling someone who is being a jerk in a thread to "cool it."



RedAdept said:


> First, I had to look up who "Nancy Grace" was...
> 
> Nope, I just hate it that people keep citing this case as a "frivolous lawsuit." People are welcome to think it was frivilous, but they should at least think so based on the actual facts.


I thought it was interesting. Craig, putting it in a beverage holder wouldn't help if it had happened while she was drinking it.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

StaceyHH said:


> I can totally see how a person could be sued for listing names in a Wall of Shame format, but how, in public, when a writer is Behaving Badly, would another writer telling them it's unprofessional/unacceptable behavior be cause for a lawsuit? Yeah, one could be seen as defamation, while the other is a direct response, in the spirit of peer review. I'm probably missing part of the big picture here.


Oh I'm not suggesting that the hot-head author in question is in the right.

Just that you never know what a jury's gonna decide... it's a risk. And one that many are unwilling to take.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I think Craig is still talking the Wall of Shame idea based on discussing private correspondences and not telling someone who is being a jerk in a thread to "cool it."


Yes, this. Thanks.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Dawn Judd said:


> Where did you read that? Everything I've read said it spilled on her when she took the lid off.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants


Actually, it was a case we went over in a business class, but it was a long time ago. Perhaps the instructor got it wrong or I am remembering it wrong.

It was the coffee that was defective, not the cup.

I stand corrected.

However, I still don't think that it was "frivolous" as you don't expect thrid degree burns from such an event.

"The jury in this case decided that the coffee was a defective product and that McDonald's had breached implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The jury also decided that the lady did bear some responsibility for what had happened. The jury said that she was twenty percent at fault and that McDonald's was eighty percent at fault for the injury."


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Nevermind, someone beat me to it.


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Yes, this. Thanks.


Oh yeah, that makes more sense. If a writer behaves badly by email, he or she still opens the field to a response, as evidenced by this thread. But creating some sort of master list of names would be way over the top.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

From Wikipedia... I see nothing here about defective cups.... do you have a source on that?

FACTS
On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, an 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49¢ cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. McDonald's required franchises to serve coffee at 180-190 °F (82-88 °C). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Prior to her lawsuit, there had been approximately 700 other burn cases involving McDonald's between 1982 and 1992. Stella placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[9] Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[10] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[12] Two years of medical treatment followed.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Nope, I just hate it that people keep citing this case as a "frivolous lawsuit." People are welcome to think it was frivilous, but they should at least think so based on the actual facts.
> 
> I agree that there are TONS of stupid, frivolous lawsuits out there, though. I just don't think this is one of them.


I actually had an incident with McDonalds when I was a teen. I bought one of those cheap little ice cream cones, ate the thing and was taking my last bite when I noticed a HUGE cockroach baked into the bottom of the cone. Half the cockroach was missing. What's worse than finding a cockroach baked into your ice cream cone? Finding HALF of one because you know you've eaten the other half.

My mother went completly nuts. The staff at the place was all flippant and said "So, it's just a little protein". I ended up spending the night in the ER to make sure I wasn't gonna get some disgusting disease from eating half a cockroach. But because the McD's staff was so flippant about it, my mother contacted a lawyer using the same argument about that hot coffee case. The lawyer did meet with us (something about emotional and physiological trauma to a young adult lol), but also explained how NOT frivolous the hot coffee suit was because my mother kept saying "But, she was successful over coffee that was hot..."

But, I gotta agree with Red. I do know the lady was burned severely down there because the coffee cup was faulty. She was in a drive through I think and put the coffee between her legs to hold the cup and the cup melted. I mean I shudder at the thought...I've held coffee like that while I'm driving before. You just expect the cup to not melt, right? And all those nerve endings down there coupled with how much a severe burn hurts...omg...that's like the stuff of nightmares!!


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> From Wikipedia... I see nothing here about defective cups.... do you have a source on that?


I posted below that I was mistaken. It was the "coffee"' that was determined to be defective.


----------



## JennaAnderson (Dec 25, 2009)

Hot topic -

I'm sure everything has been said already regarding this topic so what I say is probably not new.

If you send your work to a reviewer - it will be reviewed. You are asking for their opinion. You are asking for them to share that opinion with others. If this is not the case then why not just send it to your aunt?

The reason authors send their work to reviewers is to get the word out about their title - i.e. marketing. In most cases the point of marketing is used to increase sales. (Does person #1 in your post have this title posted for free everywhere?)

The minute you pass your work to anyone you are opening yourself up for feedback. It's the nature of the game.

When a new restaurant opens, do the owners expect people to eat there then walk away and say nothing of the food?

When a new movie is released, do the actors hope everyone is silent after it's over?

You publish so others will read. Readers give opinions.

Jenna


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

JennaAnderson said:


> If you send your work to a reviewer - it will be reviewed. You are asking for their opinion. You are asking for them to share that opinion with others. If this is not the case then why not just send it to your aunt?


I would like to add that just putting your book up for sale means that you are opening yourself up to reviews.

Reviewers have just as much right to write a review on a book that they purchased as one that was given to them, perhaps even more of a right.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

NOTE: I did feel compassion for the injuries the woman suffered. The burns were extreme. She was old. It really affected her life.

But was it McDonald's fault?

Her injuries could have been easily avoided by reasonable actions.

As the Wikipedia article points out, she had the cup between her legs and was pulling the lid off (presumably while also trying to drive). It's not the best or safest way to handle a hot liquid no matter how hot. A reasonable person would intuit a risk of spilling.

In all honesty, I used to do this myself, with cold beverages (before I gave up fastfood for diet reasons). And I spilled pop on myself more than once. So I never would have even attempted this maneuver with a hot beverage. Common sense.

The spill didn't happen while she was drinking it. It happened while she was "popping" the sip-lid on the coffee.

No one made her put it between her legs, driving not not, while doing this. Calling coffee defective because a jury arbitrarily decides how hot is too hot is not good law. But certainly the claimant was sympathetic...

Which is why I said, you never know what a jury will do.... but it's not always "decide the case based on the law."

NOTE TO MADELINE: Nope, it wasn't the cup that melted. The jury found the coffee itself "defective."


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I posted below that I was mistaken. It was the "coffee"' that was determined to be defective.


Strange. That attorney told us it was the "cup" combined with the heat of the coffee.

I think there is so much talk about this case, no one knows the truth anymore. I kinda take the Wiki stuff with a grain of salt...I'd need to read the case discovery and such before I'd be entirely convinced either way.

In any case, I still don't think it's frivilous, even if she did outright spill it on herself.


----------



## Holly A Hook (Sep 19, 2010)

Julie, good post.  I agree with you.

I agree that there are some writers out there who can't and won't take criticism, and they make the rest of us look bad.  I'm a member of an online critique group and I've had some writers get defensive with me after I took time to submit a critique, so I feel for you.

Not getting defensive and being professional is good advice.  It can only help you in the long run.  I recommend thanking your reviewers and trying to improve upon what they said.  If you're too angry to, come back to it in a few days when you've blown off some steam.


----------



## Michael Crane (Jul 22, 2010)

Holly A Hook said:


> Not getting defensive and being professional is good advice. It can only help you in the long run. I recommend thanking your reviewers and trying to improve upon what they said. If you're too angry to, come back to it in a few days when you've blown off some steam.


Well said.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I posted below that I was mistaken. It was the "coffee"' that was determined to be defective.


I see that now. We're good.

But wow, if you had had a source on that, it would indeed cast the incident in a different light. 

As for my final word on the Coffee Case... I find the injuries sympathetic, but I do find the case frivolous and the jury's decision and award both weird and excessive, respectively.

But mine is merely one opinion.

I now return this hijacked/sidetracked thread to its regularly-scheduled discussion topic, LOL...


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I mean... a woman can go through a McDonald's drive-thru, put a hot cup of coffee between her own legs, by her own choice, spill said hot coffee on herself, and then successfully sue McDonald's for millions because the coffee was ... hot!
> 
> If some idiot can get away with that...


I can't let this hang in the ether.

Said woman was scalded with 3rd degree burns and needed skin grafts on her thighs. All she asked for was that her medical bills be paid. McDonald's not only refused but ridiculed her. She had to sue to get her extensive medical bills paid.

The same store had had several complaints in the recent past from customers who had been badly burned because their coffee was too hot.

McDonalds finally settled with the woman but put a nondisclose clause on the settlement so that she couldn't tell her side of the story. One day her lawyer was on C-SPAN talking about nondisclosure clauses in settlements and how corporations use them to cover up their dastardliness -- her client couldn't talk about the settlement, but the lawyer could...

edit: oh, I see others had to comment too!


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> NOTE: I did feel compassion for the injuries the woman suffered. The burns were extreme. She was old. It really affected her life.
> 
> But was it McDonald's fault?
> 
> ...


No, she wastn' driving, as evidenced in the quote you posted from wikipedia. LOL

My point is simply that most people have spilled some coffee on themselves at some point in time. I know that I have. However, I have never suffered THIRD DEGREE burns because of it. The coffee was too hot, and it was dangerous to serve it that way.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> NOTE: I did feel compassion for the injuries the woman suffered. The burns were extreme. She was old. It really affected her life.
> 
> But was it McDonald's fault?


From the attorney's website regarding this case (and appologies for being offtopic)http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm



> At that point, Mr. Goens and the other jurors knew only the basic facts: that two years earlier, Stella Liebeck had bought a 49-cent cup of coffee at the drive-in window of an Albuquerque McDonald's, and while removing the lid to add cream and sugar had spilled it, causing third-degree burns of the groin, inner thighs and buttocks. Her suit, filed in state court in Albuquerque, claimed the coffee was "defective" because it was so hot.
> 
> What the jury didn't realize initially was the severity of her burns. Told during the trial of Mrs. Liebeck's seven days in the hospital and her skin grafts, and shown gruesome photographs, jurors began taking the matter more seriously. "It made me come home and tell my wife and daughters don't drink coffee in the car, at least not hot," says juror Jack Elliott.
> 
> ...


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Well, I've said my piece on the coffee case.

What I will say is this... every product warning ever printed on anything in America, that seems bloody obvious and unnecessary? It's because sometime, somewhere, somehow... someone was foolish enough to try it.

"Old Spice Deoderant: Not meant to be ingested or taken internally."

"Aspercreme: Do not take orally"

"Plastic Shopping Bags: Do not place over head."

and yes...

"McDonalds: Coffee is served VERY hot! Handle with care."

The list is endless...


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> From Wikipedia... I see nothing here about defective cups.... do you have a source on that?


Wikipedia articles are not known for their accuracy, and tend to be written by people who want to put a spin on an issue like this. Read the case itself.

Camille


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> Said woman was scalded with 3rd degree burns and needed skin grafts on her thighs.


As a writer, you should know not to use the passive voice.

Said woman scalded herself with 3rd degree burns.

Much better, both as prose and being closer to the truth.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Now I'm so confused -- did I put two cases together in my mind? I'm sure the lawyer was talking about nondisclosure clauses in settlements -- but if this case went to a jury, that would not apply.

Anyway - it always fries my bacon when I see this case quoted as an example of a "frivolous" lawsuit.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

swolf said:


> As a writer, you should know not to use the passive voice.
> 
> Said woman scalded herself with 3rd degree burns.
> 
> Much better, both as prose and being closer to the truth.


Now this is fun... and an exercise in writing, even...

Even better version:

"Said woman scalded herself, resulting in third-degree burns."

The word "with" would imply that the third-degree burns were the implements of her scalding...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Now this is fun... and an exercise in writing, even...
> 
> Even better version:
> 
> ...


Much better!


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2010)

StaceyHH said:


> Rather than a Wall of Shame, wouldn't it be better if OTHER writers called out the bad behavior? I think we all crave the approval of our peers, and behavior like this doesn't exist in a vacuum. So the next time a thread pops up on here, or Amazon, or Goodreads... wherever, from a writer who is raging or ridiculing a reviewer, are other writers going to participate in a pile-on, or are they going to stand up and say "That's not professional. Knock it off."


*THIS* is actually what I am hoping for. The next time someone starts a thread asking people to "vote down" a review, or ranting that a review is unfair, instead of fluffy statements, someone besides me say "There is no personal attack in that review. You may not like it, but it isn't a bad review." Or instead of saying "Keep your chin up don't let the haters get you down" say "Grow up and welcome to publishing." because you are right, this doesn't happen in a vacuum.

The reason I didn't include names is because I wanted to focus on the BEHAVIOR not the people. I didn't want to start a flame war, but a discussion on behavior. We do see this behavior every day in different degrees. We see it in the Amazon forums, on Goodreads, here, and elsewhere. The question is will you nip the weeds at the root before they spread, or add fertilizer so it grows to the point where people start threatening reviewers?


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

You're right, Julie, but I'm also hesitant to review anyone here, because they could be one of the examples. I'll get over it, of course.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *THIS* is actually what I am hoping for. The next time someone starts a thread asking people to "vote down" a review, or ranting that a review is unfair, instead of fluffy statements, someone besides me say "There is no personal attack in that review. You may not like it, but it isn't a bad review." Or instead of saying "Keep your chin up don't let the haters get you down" say "Grow up and welcome to publishing." because you are right, this doesn't happen in a vacuum.
> 
> The reason I didn't include names is because I wanted to focus on the BEHAVIOR not the people. I didn't want to start a flame war, but a discussion on behavior. We do see this behavior every day in different degrees. We see it in the Amazon forums, on Goodreads, here, and elsewhere. The question is will you nip the weeds at the root before they spread, or add fertilizer so it grows to the point where people start threatening reviewers?


An approach both brave and wise, Julie.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Now this is fun... and an exercise in writing, even...
> 
> Even better version:
> 
> ...


A better and truer version:

The coffee McDonald's served scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.

"scalded herself" implies intent and prior knowledge of the liquid's temperature.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> The coffee McDonald's served scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.
> 
> "scalded herself" implies intent and prior knowledge of the liquid's temperature.


A lawyerly revision, to be sure! But sentence structure implies the coffee somehow gained the abilty to control itself and attacked her at random or something.

Another version:

The coffee McDonald's served, when spilled, scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> A better and truer version:
> 
> The coffee McDonald's served scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.
> 
> "scalded herself" implies intent and prior knowledge of the liquid's temperature.


No, "scalded herself" does not imply intent, and she did know the coffee was hot.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

swolf said:


> No, "scalded herself" does not imply intent, and she did know the coffee was hot.


A child would know the coffee was hot, Scott. Whether she knew it was third-degree-burn hot was the heart of the case.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> A lawyerly revision, to be sure! But sentence structure implies the coffee somehow gained the abilty to control itself and attacked her at random or something.
> 
> Another version:
> 
> The coffee McDonald's served, when spilled, scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.


This one is less informative, and therefore misleading, since it doesn't relate to the reader that the women spilled the coffee herself.


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> A better and truer version:
> 
> The coffee McDonald's served scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.
> 
> "scalded herself" implies intent and prior knowledge of the liquid's temperature.


I was hoping someone would point out the intent. Even adding "accidentally" or "unintentionally" to the scalding still makes it sound like she meant to pour the liquid out, but wasn't aware of the extreme temperature. Like if you get a bath ready, then hop in, not realizing you only put in hot water.


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

I totally agree with Bards.  If you read other forums, you'll see lots of complaints about the antics of indies there too.

My cynical view is that we will suffer the "tragedy of the commons" as there is no barrier to entry, and like it or not, indies will be painted with the same brush.  For all its ills, trad publishing still keeps out (most of) the psychos, or at least drops them quick.  Trad publishing still equates with "professional writer" and as an indie it will always be a struggle to break free of the stereotype.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> A child would know the coffee was hot, Scott. Whether she knew it was third-degree-burn hot was the heart of the case.


Anyone who has drank hot coffee, knows it's hot enough that you don't want to be spilling it on yourself.


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> Trad publishing still equates with "professional writer" and as an indie it will always be a struggle to break free of the stereotype.


Kind of like "Licensed Massage Practitioner" and "masseuse." The vast majority are doing the same work with a varying degree of skill, but a few bad eggs give the whole profession a black eye.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> A lawyerly revision, to be sure! But sentence structure implies the coffee somehow gained the abilty to control itself and attacked her at random or something.
> 
> Another version:
> 
> The coffee McDonald's served, when spilled, scalded the woman, resulting in third-degree burns.


The finding of the jury was: MacDonalds intentionally and with malice aforethought scalded this woman with their coffee, when they raised the temperature to a degree which severely injured numerous people in the past.

The jury found that the woman's own actions were irrelevant, because (as shown by the other cases) she would have been severely burned if she had simply drunk the coffee too.

Camille


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

swolf said:


> Anyone who has drank hot coffee, knows it's hot enough that you don't want to be spilling it on yourself.


True! But a jury of 12 found that some arbitrary temperature (never defined in their verdict) makes coffee "defective" ... a line they further ruled McDonald's had crossed, even though absolutely no legislation has ever existed to define the line of "hot/too hot" into codified law (which would vary from state to state)... the very definition of condemnation of practice without prior notice (unwritten rules).

So McDonalds had no legal guideline informing them that there is a temperature that hot liquids ought not exceed, lest they be held to be acting in a legally irresponsible manner.

No, this Jury of 12 simply decided that legal notice had no bearing; that McDonald's should just "know" how hot is too hot, using the extent of the woman's injuries as their only rationale.... which, interestingly, is exactly what McDonald's detractors condem when people say the woman "should have known" the coffeee was hot.

So it was a very poorly-decided case. The jury held McDonalds 80 percent culpable, by the way... I think at best, a 50-50 split would have been justified.

FINAL NOTE: A more responsible course of action would have been for McDonald's to offer, right up front when it happened, to cover the woman's medical bills in the first place. It would have saved a lot of time and taxpayer money, and would have been the morally responsible thing to do.

The cost of her medical bills was around $11K. The final, pre-appeal settlement was under $600,000. But the court costs and lawyer's fees means McDonalds spent at least $1 million to try avoiding $11,000 in medical bills that they ought to have offered anyway. Bad financial decision by McDonald's. Doing the right thing is usually less expensive than trying to "prove a legal point." And think of the positive PR doing the right thing in the first place might have generated...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Jasmine Giacomo said:


> I was hoping someone would point out the intent. Even adding "accidentally" or "unintentionally" to the scalding still makes it sound like she meant to pour the liquid out, but wasn't aware of the extreme temperature. Like if you get a bath ready, then hop in, not realizing you only put in hot water.


No matter which adverbs one cares to stick in there, the fact of the matter, liguistically, is that she did 'scald herself'. She performed the action which resulted in her being burned. A classic case of the active voice being appropriate to the situation. Of course, writers like us can use the passive voice in an attempt to make the readers think the subject is being acted upon, but in this case, that's just misdirection away from the truth.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Purely off topic:

Wiki is a nice source for information but it is not always accurate especially when it comes to legal matters. In the McDonald's case, it gets many of the facts correct.

1) McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding -- capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle.
2) The woman was hospitalized for several days.
3) She tried to settle out of court before opting to sue.
4) During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.
5) McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. A company rep admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. 
6) McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur.
7) McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. Thus is it would be cool enough for consumption when they arrived at their destination. However, the company's own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

The actual case can be found on Westlaw or in any law journal (complete with legal jargon). It is a bit different and a lot more accurate than what the media, mcdonalds and most web sites describe. I also thought the suit was frivilious till I learned more about the case.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> True! But a jury of 12 found that some arbitrary temperature (never defined in their verdict) makes coffee "defective" ... a line they further ruled McDonald's had crossed, even though absolutely no legislation has ever existed to define the line of "hot/too hot" into codified law (which would vary from state to state)... the very definition of condemnation of practice without prior notice (unwritten rules).
> 
> So McDonalds had no legal guideline informing them that there is a temperature that hot liquids ought not exceed, lest they be held to be acting in a legally irresponsible manner.


That's because MacD's own internal documents showed that they KNEW how dangerous the temperature was. The law does not require that every dangerous practice be outlined in the law. They only require that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the practice was dangerous.

In this case, the legal question was - did MacDonald's have reason to believe that this would happen? Yes, they did - as evidenced by their internal records. Did they take reasonable actions to stop it? No, they didn't, also as evidenced by their internal records.

To take this back to your original point... (and our original point)

MacD's got caught doing something irresponsible, and should grow up and take the consequences. They got the 80 percent culpability, because they had all the information and evidence on their side. The KNEW better. The woman, on the other hand, has undoubtedly spilled coffee on herself before (as we all have) and it had never sent her to the hospital before - so her information was limited, and therefore her culpability was limited.

Camille


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> The finding of the jury was: MacDonalds intentionally and with malice aforethought scalded this woman with their coffee, when they raised the temperature to a degree which severely injured numerous people in the past.
> 
> The jury found that the woman's own actions were irrelevant, because (as shown by the other cases) she would have been severely burned if she had simply drunk the coffee too.
> 
> Camille


You're begging the question. We're debating whether the jury's decision was correct. Restating their decision isn't an argument. It's like debating whether OJ killed two people, and using 'the jury found him innocent' as an argument.

As for her 'simply drinking the coffee', who does that? How many times have each of us took a sip of something too hot and burned our tongues? Did we continue by 'simply drinking it' and scalding ourselves? If we did, should the person who gave us the drink be held responsible for our stupidity?


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

I know this is going off topic and I'm sorry but ... I can't stand people suing over anything and everything!  I've had so many opportunities to sue (and people have told me I was crazy because I didn't!) and I never have.  I like prices being low, by suing it makes the prices of everything go up.

Anyways, at Walt Disney World in Florida at a little Italian Restaurant in MGM (near the Toy Story restaurant) my family and I had dinner.  A waitress (who was seriously over-worked and stressed out) had too many glasses on her tray and accidentally bumped into my chair, smashing all the glasses (stemware and heavy beer mugs) on my head.  I ended up having a slight concussion and I was bleeding from the glass shards that sliced my head when they smashed.  I was literally covered in glass.  I received an apology, the waitress was bawling and my kids (aged 3 and 6 at the time) were too (it was a lot of blood).  My food had to be taken away because it was covered in glass and I was rushed into the bathroom to wash up and shake off.  I never sued!  They had called an ambulance, but I wasn't admitted to a hospital.  I was fine (sliced and had a terrible headache, but I was still alive and breathing).  I got a speed pass for the Rocking Roller-coaster (which I couldn't even ride   because I have a heart condition and my cardiologist wouldn't give me the o.k.).  But anyways it was an accident and the point is, I never sued.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I agree, Tracey, but I think the reason it's not done, generally, is that... we live in a VERY litigious society.
> 
> I mean... a woman can go through a McDonald's drive-thru, put a hot cup of coffee between her own legs, by her own choice, spill said hot coffee on herself, and then successfully sue McDonald's for millions because the coffee was ... hot!
> 
> ...


I agree about the litigious society part, truly. And, not to pick a fight, but the McDonald's thing - that is _so_ not the whole story.

Look it up on wiki or google some time if you get curious, but lets just say this:
1) The coffee wasn't just hot. It was hot enough to cause THIRD degree burns within SECONDS. ie. hot enough to melt fabric to her skin, hot enough to cause THIRD DEGREE burns, hot enough to require TWO YEARS of medical treatment - including SKIN GRAFTING. You don't just need skin grafting over hot coffee. So, what if, instead of spilling it, she had drank it? She'd have still been injured.
2) McDonald's KNEW their coffee was BURNING people. Not scalding them, BURNING them. They did nothing.

Here's the wiki article if you want to look:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

EDIT: Holy smokes - I see I'm not the first response on this. Oops! I'll catch up with the thread, now


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

Is there any way (on this board, newbie question,) to break out the McDonalds debate into a new thread? We're heading toward 50 posts on this tangent, and I can't help but wondering how Julie feels about this utter hijack of her rather significant topic?


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Still overlooks the risky practice of placing a hot beverage between your legs and trying to open it (probably with one hand, otherwise she could have stablized it and not spilled on herself).

That alone means she ought to bear more than a mere 20 percent responsibility, legally.

Still... McDonald's could have avoided it all by covering her $11K medical bills to begin with... proactively, before she even had to come back and ask.


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

What in holy hannah does McD's have to do with this topic?  I think it is a serious one and a flood of ignorant indies can and will do us all harm in the sense of making it ever more difficult to be seen as a professional writer.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> That's because MacD's own internal documents showed that they KNEW how dangerous the temperature was. The law does not require that every dangerous practice be outlined in the law. They only require that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the practice was dangerous.
> 
> In this case, the legal question was - did MacDonald's have reason to believe that this would happen? Yes, they did - as evidenced by their internal records. Did they take reasonable actions to stop it? No, they didn't, also as evidenced by their internal records.
> 
> ...


In my mind, it comes down to reasonable personal responsibility. You could walk through a grocery store, and imagine a way to hurt yourself with each and every product sold there. Should the store have to be aware of every one of these possibilities? Is someone going to sue because they choked on a marshmallow, and the store had internal documents that told them that marshmallows are larger than the human throat?

I don't need any internal document to tell me that if I spill hot coffee on myself, I'm going to get burned. It's common sense. This case is nothing but someone trying to blame someone else for their own mistake, and make some money from it.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> Anyone who has drank hot coffee, knows it's hot enough that you don't want to be spilling it on yourself.


Yeah, 'cuz it'll sting for a couple of minutes. And my skin might be red for five minutes. I don't think that I'd ever expect to be in and out of a hospital for TWO years and require skin grafting. Just sayin'...


----------



## JennaAnderson (Dec 25, 2009)

J.R. Chase said:


> I totally agree with Bards. If you read other forums, you'll see lots of complaints about the antics of indies there too.
> 
> My cynical view is that we will suffer the "tragedy of the commons" as there is no barrier to entry, and like it or not, indies will be painted with the same brush. For all its ills, trad publishing still keeps out (most of) the psychos, or at least drops them quick. Trad publishing still equates with "professional writer" and as an indie it will always be a struggle to break free of the stereotype.


Sad that you feel this way. Sad that others feel this way. Most of the stereotypes and statements like this that I've heard are coming from within. Authors, indies, publishers labeling and grouping each other. I find this sad. Hurtful is a good word for it and I have a hard time understanding it. (Please don't explain it to me - I don't want to know.) 

Jenna


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

We're onto page 8 of the thread. I think any thread that is on topic by that point is a miracle


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Yeah, 'cuz it'll sting for a couple of minutes. And my skin might be red for five minutes. I don't think that I'd ever expect to be in and out of a hospital for TWO years and require skin grafting. Just sayin'...


If you boil water at home to make tea, that tea will be just as hot (or hotter) as the coffee in this case. Most people know if they spill it on themselves, they're going to get burned. They don't need an 'internal document' to tell them that.

Hmm, now that I think about it, that's what I should do. Burn myself with hot tea at home, and then sue the stove manufacturer, because they should have known they would be heating my water to a temperature that would burn me.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

julieannfelicity said:


> I know this is going off topic and I'm sorry but ... I can't stand people suing over anything and everything! I've had so many opportunities to sue (and people have told me I was crazy because I didn't!) and I never have. I like prices being low, by suing it makes the prices of everything go up.
> 
> Anyways, at Walt Disney World in Florida at a little Italian Restaurant in MGM (near the Toy Story restaurant) my family and I had dinner. A waitress (who was seriously over-worked and stressed out) had too many glasses on her tray and accidentally bumped into my chair, smashing all the glasses (stemware and heavy beer mugs) on my head. I ended up having a slight concussion and I was bleeding from the glass shards that sliced my head when they smashed. I was literally covered in glass. I received an apology, the waitress was bawling and my kids (aged 3 and 6 at the time) were too (it was a lot of blood). My food had to be taken away because it was covered in glass and I was rushed into the bathroom to wash up and shake off. I never sued! They had called an ambulance, but I wasn't admitted to a hospital. I was fine (sliced and had a terrible headache, but I was still alive and breathing). I got a speed pass for the Rocking Roller-coaster (which I couldn't even ride  because I have a heart condition and my cardiologist wouldn't give me the o.k.). But anyways it was an accident and the point is, I never sued.


I can agree with not suing. However, did the restaurant pay for the ambulance and the emergency room visit? Because they should have. If they refused, then, yes, you should sue. Sure, it was an accident. But, that's like saying you shouldn't have your car and medical bills piad if someone hits you with their car, so long as it was just an accident.

See, the McD's woman FIRST asked for them to pay her medical bills. They refused. Only after that refusal did she sue.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Was the coffee "too hot" and therefore defective? Other facts from Wikipedia...

===

Similar lawsuits against McDonald's in the United Kingdom failed. In Bogle v. McDonalds Restaurants Ltd. Field J rejected the claim that McDonald's could have avoided injury by serving not-so-hot coffee.

"If this submission be right, McDonalds should not have served drinks at any temperature which would have caused a bad scalding injury. The evidence is that tea or coffee served at a temperature of 65 C will cause a deep thickness burn if it is in contact with the skin for just two seconds. Thus, if McDonalds were going to avoid the risk of injury by a deep thickness burn they would have had to have served tea and coffee at between 55 C and 60 C. But tea ought to be brewed with boiling water if it is to give its best flavour and coffee ought to be brewed at between 85 C and 95 C. Further, people generally like to allow a hot drink to cool to the temperature they prefer. Accordingly, I have no doubt that tea and coffee served at between 55 C and 60 C would not have been acceptable to McDonald's customers. Indeed, on the evidence, I find that the public want to be able to buy tea and coffee served hot, that is to say at a temperature of at least 65 C, even though they know (as I think they must be taken to do for the purposes of answering issues (1) and (2)) that there is a risk of a scalding injury if the drink is spilled."[14]

Though defenders of the Liebeck verdict argue that her coffee was unusually hotter than other coffee sold, other major vendors of coffee, including Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, Wendy's, and Burger King, produce coffee at a similar or higher temperature, and have been subjected to similar lawsuits over third-degree burns.[18]

Home and commercial coffee makers often reach comparable temperatures.[19] The National Coffee Association of U.S.A. instructs that coffee should be brewed "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit [9196 °C] for optimal extraction" and consumed "immediately". If not consumed immediately, the coffee is to be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit".[20]

Liebeck's attorney, Reed Morgan, and the Association of Trial Lawyers of America defend the lawsuit by claiming that McDonald's reduced the temperature of their coffee after the suit. Morgan has since brought other lawsuits against McDonald's over hot-coffee burns.[21] McDonald's policy today is to serve coffee between 8090 °C (176194 °F),[22] relying on more sternly-worded warnings to avoid future liability, though it continues to face lawsuits over hot coffee.[22][23] The Specialty Coffee Association supports improved packaging methods rather than lowering the temperature at which coffee is served.[21] The association has successfully aided the defense of subsequent coffee burn cases.[24]

Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote a unanimous 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion affirming dismissal of a similar lawsuit against coffeemaker manufacturer Bunn-O-Matic. The opinion noted that hot coffee (179 °F (82 °C) in this case) is not unreasonably dangerous.

The smell (and therefore the taste) of coffee depends heavily on the oils containing aromatic compounds that are dissolved out of the beans during the brewing process. Brewing temperature should be close to 200 °F [93 °C] to dissolve them effectively, but without causing the premature breakdown of these delicate molecules. Coffee smells and tastes best when these aromatic compounds evaporate from the surface of the coffee as it is being drunk. Compounds vital to flavor have boiling points in the range of 150160 °F [6671 °C], and the beverage therefore tastes best when it is this hot and the aromatics vaporize as it is being drunk. For coffee to be 150 °F when imbibed, it must be hotter in the pot. Pouring a liquid increases its surface area and cools it; more heat is lost by contact with the cooler container; if the consumer adds cream and sugar (plus a metal spoon to stir them) the liquid's temperature falls again. If the consumer carries the container out for later consumption, the beverage cools still further.[

---

In other words, guidelines are generally for that temperature or HIGHER... Hard to support the "neglegently hot" claim from that.

I think a more proper understanding is that McDonald's was morally negligent. They just ought to have paid the woman's medical bills as a mitzvah and been done with it without all the legal costs....


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

I heard the lady got such severe burns that she needed skin grafts. I would have sued too.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> If you boil water at home to make tea, that tea will be just as hot (or hotter) as the coffee in this case. Most people know if they spill it on themselves, they're going to get burned. They don't need an 'internal document' to tell them that.


No, it won't. Because a standard coffee mug at home will release the heat to where it's not *that* hot generally within seconds of pouring it. What's different about McDonald's coffee? The styrofoam cup, which holds in heat. Trust me, I've spilled boiling liquid on myself before (more than once). I've never lost skin or needed to be hospitalized over it. Boiling, by the way, is 100 degrees. McDs coffee was 180 - 190 degrees. Anyway, think what you will, but let me know the next time you have to be hospitalized or get skin grafted because you spilled boiling water on yourself. Not gonna happen.



swolf said:


> Hmm, now that I think about it, that's what I should do. Burn myself with hot tea at home, and then sue the stove manufacturer, because they should have known they would be heating my water to a temperature that would burn me.


Good luck with that. You'll be waiting a while, though, because spilling boiling water on yourself, while painful, is not going to require hospitalization or skin grafts.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> No, it won't. Because a standard coffee mug at home will release the heat to where it's not *that* hot generally within seconds of pouring it. What's different about McDonald's coffee? The styrofoam cup, which holds in heat. Trust me, I've spilled boiling liquid on myself before (more than once). I've never lost skin or needed to be hospitalized over it. Boiling, by the way, is 100 degrees. McDs coffee was 180 - 190 degrees. Anyway, think what you will, but let me know the next time you have to be hospitalized or get skin grafted because you spilled boiling water on yourself. Not gonna happen.
> 
> Good luck with that. You'll be waiting a while, though, because spilling boiling water on yourself, while painful, is not going to require hospitalization or skin grafts.


Do you have any evidence that shows that liquids hold their heat better in a styrofoam cup than in a ceramic cup?

As for the temperatures, you're confused between the two scales. The 180 - 190 degrees the coffee was at was using the Fahrenheit scale, where water boils at 212 degrees. The 100 degree boiling point is the Celsius scale.

As for boiling water not requiring skin grafts, water at the boiling point is the hottest water can be, because if it gets any hotter, it's no longer water, it's steam. (at normal air pressure, of course.)


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> My bf & I went to a Ruby Tuesdays awhile ago. We ordered iced tea. When my bf picked his up to take a drink, the bottom fell off of the glass; he was wearing the entire glass of tea. we weren't all that upset until the manager came over to apologize, then said, "I'm sorry, this happens all the time with these glasses. We are going to replace them eventually." What if that had been hot liquid? Geezzz... No, we didn't "sue." There was no real damage done. But, if he had burned himself, we very well might have. Also, we will never go to Ruby Tuesday's again.


And translating this into the review issue: THIS is why consumer reviews, PUBLIC reviews, not made in private, are important for all readers, and important for ALL authors.

People who never post reviews about flawed products just because an author is Indie/a fellow author hurt us all. I'm not talking that something might not be to someone's taste, like written in first person, or a teen romance without angst. I'm talking real technical flaws--like the bottoms falling out of cups. A badly formatted and edited book to me is the same as the nasty surprise of having the bottom of my cup fall off. And even worse when I find out the author KNOWS of the flaws, knows the work hasn't been edited or proofed or formatted correctly-- and is selling the book anyway! Just like that restaurant.

It's public review and opinion that will be the biggest quality control motivator _any _entity--corporation or individual-- offering ebooks or print books for public consumption.

So yeah, it stings our sensitive artistic egos, but if an author is not prepared for negative feedback along with the good, he or she shouldn't publish in the first place.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> Do you have any evidence that shows that liquids hold their heat better in a styrofoam cup than in a ceramic cup?
> 
> As for the temperatures, you're confused between the two scales. The 180 - 190 degrees the coffee was at was using the Fahrenheit scale, where water boils at 210 degrees. The 100 degree boiling point is the Celsius scale.
> 
> As for boiling water not requiring skin grafts, water at the boiling point is the hottest water can be, because if it gets any hotter, it's no longer water, it's steam. (at normal air pressure, of course.)


You're right about the temperatures - d'oh. Regardless, a few years ago I conducted an experiment and poured coffee into cups and then measured the temp with a candy thermometer. An older (ie. thin porcelain) cup lost heat fastest, followed by a stoneware mug, followed by the styrofoam.

Also non-scientific, I HAVE (unfortunately) spilled boiling water on myself. I've spilled coffee in my lap. My worst incident with hot liquids was accidentally getting my hand in the water I was draining off of spaghetti which I had just removed from the burner. I was in agony, and my skin was cherry-red for an hour, at least. But I didn't have to go to the hospital. I have never had to go to the hospital after drinking coffee or spilling coffee. Sorry, I don't care how you cut it, that's too hot. How many times have you spilled hot coffee? Did you have to go to the hospital, or, god forbid, require skin grafts?


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

terryr said:


> And translating this into the review issue: THIS is why consumer reviews, PUBLIC reviews, not made in private, are important for all readers, and important for ALL authors.
> 
> People who never post reviews about flawed products just because an author is Indie/a fellow author hurt us all. I'm not talking that something might not be to someone's taste, like written in first person, or a teen romance without angst. I'm talking real technical flaws--like the bottoms falling out of cups. A badly formatted and edited book to me is the same as the nasty surprise of having the bottom of my cup fall off. And even worse when I find out the author KNOWS of the flaws, knows the work hasn't been edited or proofed or formatted correctly-- and is selling the book anyway! Just like that restaurant.
> 
> ...


     

I gotta give you credit for even attempting to merge these two topics.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Also non-scientific, I HAVE (unfortunately) spilled boiling water on myself. I've spilled coffee in my lap. My worst incident with hot liquids was accidentally getting my hand in the water I was draining off of spaghetti which I had just removed from the burner. I was in agony, and my skin was cherry-red for an hour, at least. But I didn't have to go to the hospital. I have never had to go to the hospital after drinking coffee or spilling coffee. Sorry, I don't care how you cut it, that's too hot. How many times have you spilled hot coffee? Did you have to go to the hospital, or, god forbid, require skin grafts?


But my point is, that water from the spaghetti (if it was boiling) is the hottest water can get. It doesn't get any hotter than boiling. And the coffee this woman spilled on herself was at least 20 degrees lower than the water you burned your hand with.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

When I was 10 years old, I had a summer job babysitting a 4 year old. I made chicken noodle soup for lunch one day.

I put a bowl in front of the child at the table, then turned around to get my own bowl.

I had heated that soup to a rolling boil. (Hey, I was 10, what did I know?)

The little girl somehow managed to dump that bowl of soup in her lap as soon as I turned my back. 

Both of her thighs were burned pretty badly. She got blisters from it.

However, she did not have to go to a hospital. She did not need skin grafts. 

Incidentally, the parent of the girl did not sue me, either. LOL  She wasn't happy, obviously, but knew it was a mistake.

After that, I learned not to give soup to a child until it has cooled.  If I could learn that from one incident at the age of 10, you'd think McDonald's could learn it after 700 incidents, huh?


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

swolf said:


> But my point is, that water from the spaghetti (if it was boiling) is the hottest water can get. It doesn't get any hotter than boiling. And the coffee this woman spilled on herself was at least 20 degrees lower than the water you burned your hand with.


If the water wasn't that hot, then why'd she need freaking skin grafts?  Are you trying to say her skin was defective?


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

terryr said:


> And translating this into the review issue: THIS is why consumer reviews, PUBLIC reviews, not made in private, are important for all readers, and important for ALL authors.
> People who never post reviews about flawed products just because an author is Indie/a fellow author hurt us all. I'm not talking that something might not be to someone's taste, like written in first person, or a teen romance without angst. I'm talking real technical flaws--like the bottoms falling out of cups. A badly formatted and edited book to me is the same as the nasty surprise of having the bottom of my cup fall off. And even worse when I find out the author KNOWS of the flaws, knows the work hasn't been edited or proofed or formatted correctly-- and is selling the book anyway! Just like that restaurant.
> It's public review and opinion that will be the biggest quality control motivator _any _entity--corporation or individual-- offering ebooks or print books for public consumption.
> So yeah, it stings our sensitive artistic egos, but if an author is not prepared for negative feedback along with the good, he or she shouldn't publish in the first place.


You are correct. After that restaurant fiasco, I came home and posted a review of that restaurant somewhere, warning people. I also discuss it in forums, when the subject comes up.


----------



## Michael Crane (Jul 22, 2010)

julieannfelicity said:


> I know this is going off topic and I'm sorry but ... I can't stand people suing over anything and everything!


Just so you know, I'm suing you over this post.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> If the water wasn't that hot, then why'd she need freaking skin grafts?  Are you trying to say her skin was defective?


No, I'm saying that McDonalds isn't serving coffee made out of some kind of super-secret water that can be heated past the boiling point.

Arkali was claiming that when she accidentally poured boiling water on her hand, the burns weren't that bad. I'm simply pointing out that the coffee Mcdonalds served to this woman wasn't as hot as that boiling water.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> After that, I learned not to give soup to a child until it has cooled. If I could learn that from one incident at the age of 10, you'd think McDonald's could learn it after 700 incidents, huh?


And by extension, if you could learn that by age 10, are we truly to believe a plaintiff over seven times older had no life experience and wisdom to know better than to put hot coffee in a styrofoam container between her legs while opening the sipping lid? Just saying... it goes both ways.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> When I was 10 years old, I had a summer job babysitting a 4 year old. I made chicken noodle soup for lunch one day.
> 
> I put a bowl in front of the child at the table, then turned around to get my own bowl.
> 
> ...


If the girl spilled soup the temperature of boiling water on her lap, that soup was hotter than the Mcdonalds coffee this woman spilled on herself.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

swolf said:


> If the girl spilled soup the temperature of boiling water on her lap, that soup was hotter than the Mcdonalds coffee this woman spilled on herself.


I didn't say that the temperature was boiling when I served it. I said that it was boiling, then I poured it into a bowl (which has a lot of surface for cooling), then walked it to the table. I'm certain that it cooled somewhat during that time.

I was making the point that putting boiling water into a styrofoam cup, then clapping a lid on it, seals in more heat.


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

These posts dance around the law of tort and all the elements one has to show in order to succeed - duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages (roughly).  The plaintiff was able to prove each element in front of jury and won.  Juries are people who drink coffee and know coffee is generally served hot.

All these other examples people are bringing up do not contain all the elements of tort.  A stove manufacturer wouldn't owe you a duty of care with regard to boiling your own water.  It would owe you a duty of care not to electricute you when you turned it on, etc.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

A UK court on a similar case held differently.

Also ruled that serving the coffee at a lower heat would not have fixed things, nor was a similar level of heat excessive, because of the necessary brewing and maintenance heat of coffee.

Tons of other retailers serve coffee at temperatures as hot or hotter.

The verdict on legal grounds just doesn't hold up to any standard other than, "We feel bad for the victim."

That's why McDonalds should have just paid her $11K legal bills and be done with it. Proactively, before she even had to ask.

But that's morality, not law...


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> These posts dance around the law of tort and all the elements one has to show in order to succeed - duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages (roughly). The plaintiff was able to prove each element in front of jury and won. Juries are people who drink coffee and know coffee is generally served hot.


Are you claiming that a jury has never come back with a crazy verdict?



J.R. Chase said:


> All these other examples people are bringing up do not contain all the elements of tort. A stove manufacturer wouldn't owe you a duty of care with regard to boiling your own water. It would owe you a duty of care not to electricute you when you turned it on, etc.


Yes, I was using a ridiculous example to make a point.

But only slightly more ridiculous than the Mcdonalds case.


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

I do think there are a lot of Monday morning quarterbacks out there.  A wiki summary is no match for weeks of testimony and mountains of evidence the jury heard.  Each case is based on its facts, and the fact that a similar case lost in the UK is of no relevance to the particular US case.  

A jury decision may seem "crazy" only because you haven't heard the extensive detailed evidence presented at trial, hours and hours of testimony from key witnesses, etc.,  vs. a quickie summary of the facts on the net.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> But only slightly more ridiculous than the Mcdonalds case.


Personally, I don't think the case was ridiculous, but that's me. Skin grafts = not ridiculous. We'll have to agree to disagree, but I think we've beat this one into the ground


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> A jury decision may seem "crazy" only because you haven't heard the extensive detailed evidence presented at trial, hours and hours of testimony from key witnesses, etc., vs. a quickie summary of the facts on the net.


Or, as it is more accurately known... "lawyer spin."

As someone once said, "If you can't fascinate them with facts, baffle them with BS."


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Arkali said:


> Personally, I don't think the case was ridiculous, but that's me. Skin grafts = not ridiculous. We'll have to agree to disagree, but I think we've beat this one into the ground


Ditto!


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

I guess I have a lot more respect for juries than that - they tend to know when they are being sold a bill of goods.



CraigInTwinCities said:


> Or, as it is more accurately known... "lawyer spin."
> 
> As someone once said, "If you can't fascinate them with facts, baffle them with BS."


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

terryr said:


> And translating this into the review issue: THIS is why consumer reviews, PUBLIC reviews, not made in private, are important for all readers, and important for ALL authors.
> 
> People who never post reviews about flawed products just because an author is Indie/a fellow author hurt us all. I'm not talking that something might not be to someone's taste, like written in first person, or a teen romance without angst. I'm talking real technical flaws--like the bottoms falling out of cups. A badly formatted and edited book to me is the same as the nasty surprise of having the bottom of my cup fall off. And even worse when I find out the author KNOWS of the flaws, knows the work hasn't been edited or proofed or formatted correctly-- and is selling the book anyway! Just like that restaurant.
> 
> ...


I think this is a valid point, but I would add that reviewers of indie books should realize that they must review with more GRAVITY than when they're reviewing something by a more established author. It is more than possible that the reason authors who don't have a big marketing budget behind their book react like maniacs when the receive a bad review is that it MEANS so much more to them than say a Tom Clancy or a Stephen King. I'm not arguing they don't care about reviews. I'm sure that, to some extent, they do. However, one bad review doesn't mean as much to the career of an already substantially established author as it does to an author struggle to get noticed at all. I think you should be honest and review with integrity, but I also think a complete hatchet job is something you might consider sending an small time author in private. After all, one sweeping, negative review could choke off that author's income altogether and cause them to flip their wig. If you care about flipping wigs or being howled at via e-mail for that matter, keep this in mind. After all, as in Bards and Sages example, there is a big difference between a publisher sending a harsh but helpful review to you personally and a review appearing on the internet for all to see. One is a growing experience. The other is a kick in the... Well, it's more jarring. Let's just say that. Part of being professional is being tactful. If you don't want to be tactful, fine, but you'd better be a good counter puncher if you decide to go down this road. Because people are going to get mad. Should they? I don't know. I think that has to be decided case by case. But will they? Yeah. That's just brass tacks.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> I guess I have a lot more respect for juries than that - they tend to know when they are being sold a bill of goods.


Ever sat on a jury?

I have.

People bring their own agendas to the table, and with a forceful enough personality... their agendas can overrule matters of law.

Fortunately, we had a good foreman (not me, in case you were wondering) who kept heads level and eyes focused on the law... but I definitely saw some people who, had they been named foreman, would have pushed through a pre-determined preference on the verdict.

Our system is one of the best in the world... but it's not flawless.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> I guess I have a lot more respect for juries than that - they tend to know when they are being sold a bill of goods.


'Tend to' I agree with. But that doesn't preclude the possibility of one being completely wrong. So, to defend this one by claiming they 'looked at the evidence', is just an assumption that no jury can come to a wrong decision.

At its core, this case is about a woman who spilled hot coffee on herself, and was awarded over $2 million by a jury for doing that. I don't have to have sat on that jury to know that's a ridiculous judgement.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

swolf said:


> No, I'm saying that McDonalds isn't serving coffee made out of some kind of super-secret water that can be heated past the boiling point.
> 
> Do you have any evidence that shows that liquids hold their heat better in a styrofoam cup than in a ceramic cup?


Two points - water can be heated past its "normal" boiling point by adding other things to it - sugar or salt for instance. However, I doubt coffee beans would raise the boiling point much, if at all. Just a random science fact for the day.

Liquids definitely hold their heat better in a styrofoam cup. Haven't you ever noticed that styrofoam stays relatively cool to the touch, while ceramic cups feel burning to the touch? That's why they have handles, while styrofoam cups don't.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> Two points - water can be heated past its "normal" boiling point by adding other things to it - sugar or salt for instance. However, I doubt coffee beans would raise the boiling point much, if at all. Just a random science fact for the day.


True. Which only reinforces my point, since it makes the possible gap between boiled water and this Mcdonalds coffee even (slightly) larger.



Jessica Billings said:


> Liquids definitely hold their heat better in a styrofoam cup. Haven't you ever noticed that styrofoam stays relatively cool to the touch, while ceramic cups feel burning to the touch? That's why they have handles, while styrofoam cups don't.


Sounds logical. But the coffee in the Mcdonalds styrofoam cup had already been reduced to 180-190 degrees. How long it would take boiling water poured into a ceramic cup to drop to that temperature?


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Or, as it is more accurately known... "lawyer spin."
> 
> As someone once said, "If you can't fascinate them with facts, baffle them with BS."


Hmmm. So you're going to bash lawyers and the legal profession as a whole based on a few bad apples? Does that mean I should bash authors and the writing profession as a whole based on a few bad apples?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> You're begging the question. We're debating whether the jury's decision was correct. Restating their decision isn't an argument. It's like debating whether OJ killed two people, and using 'the jury found him innocent' as an argument.
> 
> As for her 'simply drinking the coffee', who does that? How many times have each of us took a sip of something too hot and burned our tongues? Did we continue by 'simply drinking it' and scalding ourselves? If we did, should the person who gave us the drink be held responsible for our stupidity?


The thing is, this is not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of law. My quoting of the jury was in response to the semantic discussion of passive voice.

The law stuff is not debatable. I was explaining the point of law, not the jury's opinion. OJ wasn't found innocent because of a point of law - he was found innocent because the jury didn't believe the validity of the evidence against him. That is not the case here. This is actually a pretty cut and dried case, and the evidence was not based on the complainant's version of the truth at all. OJ didn't have to testify against himself, but since this was not a criminal case, MacD's did. And the findings of facts were based entirely on their own internal records.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is, or mine - the key is that MacDonald's had in their own documents that THEY expected people to be burned, and they took no action to ameliorate this. That's the crux of the case. They knew they were guilty and had settled every other case out of court - but instead of doing the smart thing and settling this one too, they thought they could get away with it. They gambled and lost. Because in the end they were caught red handed.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> True. Which only reinforces my point, since it makes the possible gap between boiled water and this Mcdonalds coffee even (slightly) larger.
> 
> Sounds logical. But the coffee in the Mcdonalds styrofoam cup had already been reduced to 180-190 degrees. How long it would take boiling water poured into a ceramic cup to drop to that temperature?


Okay, I know I said I was going to drop this. But... TWO YEARS of in and out of hospitals. SKIN GRAFTS. Sorry, that's not ridiculous, and that's definitely not normal injuries from spilling hot coffee on yourself. It's not like she had an owie - she had MAJOR medical issues, beyond what one would expect from spilling coffee on themselves (which would be an owie).

Also - your slightly backwards in your idea (kind of like I was with my temps). The styrofoam is cool to the touch because it's insulating the liquid. The stoneware is letting off heat, which is why it "feels" hot (heck, it IS hot). The stoneware's liquid will cool faster.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> The thing is, this is not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of law. My quoting of the jury was in response to the semantic discussion of passive voice.
> 
> The law stuff is not debatable. I was explaining the point of law, not the jury's opinion. OJ wasn't found innocent because of a point of law - he was found innocent because the jury didn't believe the validity of the evidence against him. That is not the case here. This is actually a pretty cut and dried case, and the evidence was not based on the complainant's version of the truth at all. OJ didn't have to testify against himself, but since this was not a criminal case, MacD's did. And the findings of facts were based entirely on their own internal records.
> 
> ...


Mcdonalds didn't break any law. They lost the case because the jury decided they lost the case. Put another jury in there and the case could have gone the other way.

And as someone pointed out, someone can be burned by the coffee McDonalds is currently serving. If they made it a temperature that couldn't burn people, no one would buy it.

And as I said before, stores know that people can choke on marshmallows, break their own fingers with hammers, cut off their toes with lawn mowers, kill themselves in cars, cut themselves on broken glassware, or trip on untied shoelaces. Should these companies be responsible when people do these things with their products?


----------



## StaceyHH (Sep 13, 2010)

swolf said:


> True. Which only reinforces my point, since it makes the possible gap between boiled water and this Mcdonalds coffee even (slightly) larger.
> 
> Sounds logical. But the coffee in the Mcdonalds styrofoam cup had already been reduced to 180-190 degrees. How long it would take boiling water poured into a ceramic cup to drop to that temperature?


Tea drinkers play with these numbers all the time. 8oz of 205dg water will reach about 170 in less than 20 seconds, if it's poured into a non-preheated ceramic vessel without a cover, assuming the air is a comfortable temperature, and one is not pouring from too great a height, which will cool liquid faster. Hardcore japanese tea (sencha) drinkers use a variety of thin-walled ceramics specifically because of their fast heat-releasing properties, which will lower the temperatures even more quickly than a ceramic mug. I use a glass pitcher as a water cooler before making my matcha, which cools 205dg water to 140 in about a minute and a half.

Styrofoam and some insulated plastics can hold temps within 5-10 degrees of brewing temps for several minutes, since they transfer heat very poorly. Paper cups hold heat mainly by virtue of being covered, and your 195dg $starbuck$ probably drops to 175-180 just between pouring, lidding and handing it off to the customer. ($starbuck$ by my office says their coffee is held at 180, and the one a few blocks away told me 195. I don't know what the official policy is.)

Just a few points of reference on different containers.

One other point of reference: a 3rd degree burn is one in which ALL the skin is burned off in a particular area. All. Down to the subcutaneous fat layer. It doesn't grow back on it's own. It has to be filled in from the burn margins, or pieced together by grafts - ie: slicing the entire skin from another area of the body to replace it.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Not really relevant, other than as to why McDonald's kept doing it, but my stint in the fast food world revealed that for many people there was no such thing as too hot coffee and fresh from the pot wasn't good enough. They'd demand it microwaved and claim we'd had it sitting around as steam poured from it.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Okay, I know I said I was going to drop this. But... TWO YEARS of in and out of hospitals. SKIN GRAFTS. Sorry, that's not ridiculous, and that's definitely not normal injuries from spilling hot coffee on yourself. It's not like she had an owie - she had MAJOR medical issues, beyond what one would expect from spilling coffee on themselves (which would be an owie).


You're missing the point. You didn't injure yourself with water that was hotter than that McDonalds coffee. Why should McDonalds be held responsible because someone did injure themself with that less-hot coffee? Since it obviously isn't the temperature that is the only factor in this.



Arkali said:


> Also - your slightly backwards in your idea (kind of like I was with my temps). The styrofoam is cool to the touch because it's insulating the liquid. The stoneware is letting off heat, which is why it "feels" hot (heck, it IS hot). The stoneware's liquid will cool faster.


That has nothing to do with what I posted.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Serious question for coffee drinkers (I'm not one):

Would you buy coffee from any place that served it at a much lower temperature... say... 110 degrees F? Because no one would ever be scalded at that temp...


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

I suck at proofing my own stuff, too.

Everyone gets a bad review now and then.

"The problem with narcissistic types, though, is now culture wide."

Amen


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Harry Shannon said:


> I suck at proofing my own stuff, too.


I had a piece I worked on forever, a short story. I had a very trusted and exacting friend play editor. We discussed this thing for weeks, each of us reading it repeatedly. I sent it to another friend -- and she found a typo.  I've had it happen other times, but this was the time that really got me, especially after making a point of telling her how hard I'd worked on the thing, and how much effort my other friend had put into it.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> Mcdonalds didn't break any law. They lost the case because the jury decided they lost the case. Put another jury in there and the case could have gone the other way.


Highly unlikely. As I said, the case law was really solid on that one.

The thing I have to go back to is that, much as people would like to use this as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, it just isn't. It's solid. All those other examples you give of possible dangers haven't ended in lawsuits, why? Because the manufacturers have behaved responsibly.

I know it's really popular to believe that non-criminal cases are not about law -- but if it gets to court, it's about the law. It's about case law and it's about precedent, just like any other legal action.

Camille


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Highly unlikely. As I said, the case law was really solid on that one.
> 
> The thing I have to go back to is that, much as people would like to use this as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, it just isn't. It's solid. All those other examples you give of possible dangers haven't ended in lawsuits, why? Because the manufacturers have behaved responsibly.
> 
> ...


I've sat on a jury. Jury members are not lawyers. Case-law does not always play the biggest role.


----------



## J.R. Chase (Jun 22, 2010)

Absolutely yes, if the following:

- The marshmallows were made with an undisclosed substance that was not industry standard and was super sticky and tough to swallow
- The hammer heads were not diligently attached to the handle and flew off and broke a finger
- The lawn mower has not safety guard for feet
- The cars had known safety deficiencies that were not addressed (hello every car company out there at one time or another)
- The glassware was made with materials known to be hazardous as it shatters at the slightest bump

You don't seem to grasp the fact that manufacturers / sellers owe certain duties of care to you and I, the consumers. If they breach that duty of care to you and cause damage, you have a cause of action against them. That is our legal system, and it does in fact help to ensure that you can purchase products and be reasonably sure they won't maim or kill you with normal use. I want to know that when I start my lawnmower the blade won't fly out and chop the bottoms of my legs off. I don't have the ability to analyze the metals used in the mechanisms in the mower to ensure they are up to the forces involved. And I don't have to. The mower maker has that responsibility, and if they fail, they pay.



swolf said:


> And as I said before, stores know that people can choke on marshmallows, break their own fingers with hammers, cut off their toes with lawn mowers, kill themselves in cars, cut themselves on broken glassware, or trip on untied shoelaces. Should these companies be responsible when people do these things with their products?


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

J.R. Chase said:


> Absolutely yes, if the following:
> 
> - The marshmallows were made with an undisclosed substance that was not industry standard and was super sticky and tough to swallow
> - The hammer heads were not diligently attached to the handle and flew off and broke a finger
> ...


http://snltranscripts.jt.org/77/77dconsumerprobe.phtml


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> I've sat on a jury. Jury members are not lawyers. Case-law does not always play the biggest role.


But it does play a role in whether it gets to the jury, and what happens on appeal. And furthermore, it happens that this case was not a rogue jury: the findings were right in line with case law and precedent.

And that's my point. There are lots of cases out there that would make a much better case for the "frivolous lawsuit" argument - but this isn't one of them. There was no jury nullification. The law was solid. (I believe there was an adjustment of the amount of the award on appeal, but the finding of fault was solid.)

The problem is that most frivolous lawsuits never make it to court, and they are not brought with any intention of taking it to court. They are usually bully tactics by whoever has the biggest pot of money in a dispute - brought to intimidate the other side. Usually the filing itself is too expensive to answer and the other side gives in. Of if it's an ordinary citizen bringing a frivolous suit against a company, it is either settled or gets thrown out.

But that kind of tort abuse is not popular with tort-reform advocates because those groups tend to be funded by the people who commit the most abuse. So we don't hear about it in the press, even though it's an every day occurrence.

Camille


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Highly unlikely. As I said, the case law was really solid on that one.


Can you list the cases this judgement was based upon?



daringnovelist said:


> The thing I have to go back to is that, much as people would like to use this as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, it just isn't. It's solid. All those other examples you give of possible dangers haven't ended in lawsuits, why? Because the manufacturers have behaved responsibly.


Mcdonalds was selling hot coffee, just like they advertised (and just like they warned about on the container). How were they behaving irresponsibly?



daringnovelist said:


> I know it's really popular to believe that non-criminal cases are not about law -- but if it gets to court, it's about the law. It's about case law and it's about precedent, just like any other legal action.


It's popular because common sense disagrees with the decision.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

J.R. Chase said:


> Absolutely yes, if the following:
> 
> - The marshmallows were made with an undisclosed substance that was not industry standard and was super sticky and tough to swallow
> - The hammer heads were not diligently attached to the handle and flew off and broke a finger
> ...


And you're not grasping the fact that Mcdonalds wasn't selling defective merchandise. They were selling exactly what they were advertising - hot coffee.

Your examples would only be comparable if they put something in the coffee that wasn't supposed to be there, and someone was injured from it.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Hmmm... I don't see anyone lining up for non-harmful, environmentally-friendly 110 degrees F coffee...

(Otherwise referred to by my father, a heavy coffee drinker for years, as "lukewarm &#$!")


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> But it does play a role in whether it gets to the jury, and what happens on appeal. And furthermore, it happens that this case was not a rogue jury: the findings were right in line with case law and precedent.


Not true:

http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/



> Thirteen courts have reported opinions looking at product-liability/failure-to-warn claims alleging that coffee was "unreasonably dangerous" and the provider was thus liable when the plaintiff spilled coffee on him- or herself. Twelve courts correctly threw the case out. Another trial court in New Mexico, however, didn't, and became a national icon when the jury claimed that Stella Liebeck deserved $2.9 million in compensatory and punitive damages because McDonald's dared to sell the 79-year-old hot 170-degree coffee.
> 
> The case is ludicrous on its face, as a matter of law and as a matter of common sense. Eleven years later, this should be beyond debate, yet somehow, it keeps coming up in the blogs, and we keep having to refute it.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

jbh13md said:


> I think this is a valid point, but I would add that reviewers of indie books should realize that they must review with more GRAVITY than when they're reviewing something by a more established author. It is more than possible that the reason authors who don't have a big marketing budget behind their book react like maniacs when the receive a bad review is that it MEANS so much more to them than say a Tom Clancy or a Stephen King. I'm not arguing they don't care about reviews. I'm sure that, to some extent, they do. However, one bad review doesn't mean as much to the career of an already substantially established author as it does to an author struggle to get noticed at all. I think you should be honest and review with integrity, but I also think a complete hatchet job is something you might consider sending an small time author in private. After all, one sweeping, negative review could choke off that author's income altogether and cause them to flip their wig. If you care about flipping wigs or being howled at via e-mail for that matter, keep this in mind. After all, as in Bards and Sages example, there is a big difference between a publisher sending a harsh but helpful review to you personally and a review appearing on the internet for all to see. One is a growing experience. The other is a kick in the... Well, it's more jarring. Let's just say that. Part of being professional is being tactful. If you don't want to be tactful, fine, but you'd better be a good counter puncher if you decide to go down this road. Because people are going to get mad. Should they? I don't know. I think that has to be decided case by case. But will they? Yeah. That's just brass tacks.


I strongly disagree with this. 
I am a very firm believer in treating all authors equally. By "babying" an Indie author, you are saying that you are not holding them to the higher standards of a Commercially Published author.
In my reviews, I treat a book as a book. Period. I do not take into account who wrote it, how they published it, whether they are in a wheelchair, or what their living circumstances are. 
"If you wanna play with the big kids, you need to understand that you will be treated like them."
If you want someone to treat you like you are a "special ed" writer, then put that in your book description: "Hey, I'm a self-published author, therefore not very professional, so don't say anything bad about my book or I'm gonna cry."
The biggest reason my blog is popular is simply because I review all books as if they were written by Stephen King or Dean Koonts or James Patterson or any big named author.
Go read my blog. My writing style isn't all that special. There are plenty of "casual" reviewers who write far better than I. It's not about that. It's about the honesty.
If I started "being soft" on Indie books, my blog would go down the drain.
Now, go make a thread with a poll asking the Indie authors here if they want "special treatment." I seriously doubt you will have any takers, except those few who have been dinged for editing.
I think Indie Publishing these days is all about being taken seriously. Indie authors want to be taken seriously.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> Can you list the cases this judgement was based upon?
> 
> Mcdonalds was selling hot coffee, just like they advertised (and just like they warned about on the container). How were they behaving irresponsibly?
> 
> It's popular because common sense disagrees with the decision.


Once upon a time I could have, but dude, it was over fifteen years ago. But it's such basic law that you could cite just about any negligence case. It's like saying "cite the cases that prove robbing a bank is theft." I'm not going to go to the law library and submit the case to you. If you really care about it, you should read the actual case law yourself, and stop listening to people on the internet and the radio.

I've told you how they were behaving irresponsibly (they knew what was likely to happen, they _acknowledged it was wrong_ before they did it, and they did it anyway - that's the very definition of irresponsible behavior). If you don't want to believe it, hey, I'm just a person on the internet. Read the actual case and related law yourself.

A lot of people like to excuse ignorance by claiming "common sense" but that doesn't hold water. Common sense says the earth is flat, and the sun rotates around it - until you have sufficient information to understand it.

Camille


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

A company sells knives/coffee.  And because people like sharp/hot knives/coffee, this company makes its knives/coffee very sharp/hot.  

For safety reasons, they put a warning on the container, claiming that this knife/coffee is very sharp/hot, and it could cut/burn you.

A man buys one of these knives/coffees, and uses it in way that it shouldn't be used, and accidentally cuts/burns himself, very badly.

He decides that the knives/coffee company made the knives/coffee too sharp/hot, and it is their fault he got cut/burned.  He sues them and is awarded $2.9 million for cutting/burning himself with this knive/coffee.

Make sense?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> Not true:
> 
> http://overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban-legends-and-stella-liebeck-and-the-mcdonalds-coffee-case/


That's not a legitimate legal resource. That's a lobbyist site. Bring me the appeals court ruling that voids the finding of fault with MacDonald's and I'll be happy to acknowledge it. (And I'm not talking about the adjustment of the award, I'm talking about fault - because that's what this conversation is about.)

Camille


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Once upon a time I could have, but dude, it was over fifteen years ago. But it's such basic law that you could cite just about any negligence case. It's like saying "cite the cases that prove robbing a bank is theft." I'm not going to go to the law library and submit the case to you. If you really care about it, you should read the actual case law yourself, and stop listening to people on the internet and the radio.


Nope, 'do the research yourself' doesn't cut it. You're making the claim.

And robbing a bank is against the law. Mcdonalds didn't break any laws.



daringnovelist said:


> I've told you how they were behaving irresponsibly (they knew what was likely to happen, they _acknowledged it was wrong_ before they did it, and they did it anyway - that's the very definition of irresponsible behavior). If you don't want to believe it, hey, I'm just a person on the internet. Read the actual case and related law yourself.


No, you've claimed that a company knowing someone could hurt themselves with their product is 'irresponsible', but that's clearly not the truth, since almost every company sells something that could hurt people.



daringnovelist said:


> A lot of people like to excuse ignorance by claiming "common sense" but that doesn't hold water. Common sense says the earth is flat, and the sun rotates around it - until you have sufficient information to understand it.


And a lot of people like to excuse ignorance by making claims they can't back up.

I've cited a source that shows eleven other similar cases were thrown out of court. There is no precedent in this case as you're claiming.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

And now we're playing I Like My Sources, You Like Your Sources and going in circles.

I still say that as a matter of law, the decision was wacky, but as a matter of morality, McD's should have just paid the medical bills of the plaintiff and avoided all the additional expense. As a good deed, a mitzvah, before she ever had to ask. It would have generated tons of good press for them.

But let's move beyond the redundancies and return to our regularly-scheduled topic!  I think it had something to do with how writers deal with critiques ... or maybe whether fluffy bunnies are cute or evil masterminds plotting to take over the world...

...something like that!


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> That's not a legitimate legal resource. That's a lobbyist site. Bring me the appeals court ruling that voids the finding of fault with MacDonald's and I'll be happy to acknowledge it. (And I'm not talking about the adjustment of the award, I'm talking about fault - because that's what this conversation is about.)


I've cited a source outside of my own opinion, and you refuse to accept them. And when I question your claims, you tell me to look them up myself.

Unbelievable.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> And now we're playing I Like My Sources, You Like Your Sources and going in circles.


Huh? Where are the opposing sources?


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

Once upon a time, this thread was actually interesting. Too bad it got side-tracked by the now seemingly never-ending McDonald's litigation debate.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Yes, but the subject line may or may not still apply.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

Good one, Michelle.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

swolf said:


> Nope, 'do the research yourself' doesn't cut it. You're making the claim.
> 
> And robbing a bank is against the law. Mcdonalds didn't break any laws.
> 
> ...


You're the one making the claim. You're claiming that an actual legal finding of law is not legitimate. (A finding that MacDonalds, for all it's lawyers, could not overturn on appeals). Sorry, but I don't need to prove it. It's been proven. All I have to do is explain it.

You can cite Fox news and lobbyist sites all day long - but they don't have any more standing than you or me. They're just people spouting opinions. I'm not going to find some opposing lobbyist site to give you opinions to support me, because they would not be legitimate either. Yeah, it's EASY to do that, but it's irrelevant.

This isn't about opinions. It's about law. And it's all IN the court case and appeals finding itself. That's where the legitimate sources are.

You and I both know that legitimate legal research is time-consuming and expensive. All this "find the source" is bull. I did my legal readings on it when I was a student and I'm not going to the expense of doing it again just for you. If that makes you feel superior, I just have one question: Have you read the actual case? Did you read the appeal?

Maybe you have. It was a long time ago for me. Maybe I've forgotten some point. Please remind me of the actual point of law I've forgotten that was addressed in the appeal. You're the one with the claim. Please explain it.

Camille


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

R. Reed said:


> Good one, Michelle.


Thanks, but I'm very much in a glass house on this one.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I think Indie Publishing these days is all about being taken seriously. Indie authors want to be taken seriously.


Yes! We don't have a chance if we're treated any differently.


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I think Indie Publishing these days is all about being taken seriously. Indie authors want to be taken seriously.


Though your point about any book deserving the same standards of judgment is well made, my clown afro and I have this to say about the line above:

We do?


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Sorry if I this was brought up and I skipped it - The coffee thing lost me jumped.



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I told myself then that I wanted to be THAT publisher for other writers. Because what he did for me was so important to my growth. It is very easy to find cheerleaders in this industry. It is much harder to find drill seargants.


And yet&#8230; when there was a thread about writers giving other writers negative reviews the attitude was decidedly mixed&#8230; words like unprofessional, arrogant, etc. were floating around along with the statement: "I read like a writer so I shouldn't critique." Not to resurrect an old argument but doesn't a little heat in the kitchen make it easier to grow a thicker skin? If authors treated each other to a little more reviewing "reality" rather than taking a pass when a book was so bad you couldn't finish it wouldn't that ease the shock of having a critic 'burn your ego'?

I am not advocating reviewing things if you see a negative review as ugly and it makes you feel bad. No one should be forced to give a negative review if that isn't their style at all. But if someone does cross that bridge, and gives a well thought out critique with specific examples and there is resulting "hostility"&#8230; Do the thoughts run to the line of "I told you so, you shouldn't have gone out on a limb?" Which is honestly how the thread felt for me. Or more along the line of, "it is a valuable service and this is part of having your book published, the author need to grow up and get an editor."

This is slightly different in this case the author didn't solicit the review specifically but&#8230; in a way they are publishing at Amazon so they know that reviews are part of the process.

Oh -- if you are clicking on my link and can't find my book it is because I have grown-up and gotten an editor.  It will probably be back in a few weeks.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> You're the one making the claim. You're claiming that an actual legal finding of law is not legitimate. (A finding that MacDonalds, for all it's lawyers, could not overturn on appeals). Sorry, but I don't need to prove it. It's been proven. All I have to do is explain it.


Huh? The $2.9 million settlement was lowered by the judge. So the actual finding of the law disagrees with you.



daringnovelist said:


> You can cite Fox news and lobbyist sites all day long - but they don't have any more standing than you or me. They're just people spouting opinions. I'm not going to find some opposing lobbyist site to give you opinions to support me, because they would not be legitimate either. Yeah, it's EASY to do that, but it's irrelevant.


What the hell does Fox News have to do with anything?

I cited an outside source, and you want me to believe you just because you say so.



daringnovelist said:


> This isn't about opinions. It's about law. And it's all IN the court case and appeals finding itself. That's where the legitimate sources are.
> 
> You and I both know that legitimate legal research is time-consuming and expensive. All this "find the source" is bull. I did my legal readings on it when I was a student and I'm not going to the expense of doing it again just for you. If that makes you feel superior, I just have one question: Have you read the actual case? Did you read the appeal?
> 
> Maybe you have. It was a long time ago for me. Maybe I've forgotten some point. Please remind me of the actual point of law I've forgotten that was addressed in the appeal. You're the one with the claim. Please explain it.


Once again, it's just more 'believe me because I say so'. Out of twelve similars cases, only ONE was allowed to go to a jury, because judges knew the law better than you do, and didn't think the cases were worthwhile.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

I make my living as a professional writer. I've sold more than a dozen novels to NY publishers over the last several years and hope to sell another two or three before the year's out. I'm also a trained creativity coach and I work with writers to help improve their craft on a paid basis. I like giving back to writing communities that have helped me in the past (HWA, ITW, etc) and had thought about offering a kind of online workshop here - someone volunteers some of their work, I'd go through it in the same way I do for my paying clients, and everyone else could chime in so we all learned something in the end.

But you know what?

This very attitude -


> when there was a thread about writers giving other writers negative reviews the attitude was decidedly mixed&#8230; words like unprofessional, arrogant, etc. were floating around


...made me think I had to be nuts to suggest it. Not because I don't think people would benefit, but because there's this attitude that a writer publicly pointing out flaws in another writer's work was unacceptable, as evidence by this thread.

In fact, I even hesitated to write this post, because I was afraid there were some people who would see the listing of my professional credentials above as arrogance rather than simply being used to show I have some experience in this industry. It sucks that that's the case.

Personally, I think the best person to review a work IS another writer, as they understand the critical aspects (construction, theme, voice, pov, etc) that make a story succeed or not. A reader typically says "I didn't like it" but a writer might say "the structure of the novel didn't work for me, because the writer chose a central conflict that was unbelievable in correlation with the main characters motivations." (or something like that) I'm not putting down readers, only noting that writers have a level of experience with the craft of writing that readers do not usually have.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

swolf and darlingnovelist--

you are sooooo off topic at this point, please move on and back to the topic. Further posts about the suit will be removed as being off topic. Thanks.

Betsy







_<==no this isn't really me._


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> This very attitude -
> ...made me think I had to be nuts to suggest it. Not because I don't think people would benefit, but because there's this attitude that a writer publicly pointing out flaws in another writer's work was unacceptable, as evidence by this thread.
> 
> In fact, I even hesitated to write this post, because I was afraid there were some people who would see the listing of my professional credentials above as arrogance rather than simply being used to show I have some experience in this industry. It sucks that that's the case.
> ...


Ah, a kindred sprit at long last. I thought exactly the same thing. I posted my review of Asylum and had decidedly mixed support when I used "writer terms." It was suggested that I was arrogant which p*ssed me off. It took me hours to comb through that book and offer my suggestions. It was also suggested that the 1-star review I gave another author was negative or a slam&#8230; Not true. I did write a slam of the book but I sent it to a writer friend and we laughed, privately, about the main character turning into a kitchen sponge and Umpa Lumpas in fetish gear but that's another topic.

If you want a work to tear apart I will offer mine up for sacrifice. I pulled it because I have typos and plan on seeing an editor to deal with them but it's my first book and I have no illusions of my own grandeur. Free education is great. I will happily send a copy to anyone who wants to join the group critique.

Oh - its Urban Fantasy so there are off color remarks, sex scenes, and of course cannibalism&#8230; classy cannibalism but just the same probably not for the kiddies.


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> I make my living as a professional writer. I've sold more than a dozen novels to NY publishers over the last several years and hope to sell another two or three before the year's out. I'm also a trained creativity coach and I work with writers to help improve their craft on a paid basis. I like giving back to writing communities that have helped me in the past (HWA, ITW, etc) and had thought about offering a kind of online workshop here - someone volunteers some of their work, I'd go through it in the same way I do for my paying clients, and everyone else could chime in so we all learned something in the end.
> 
> But you know what?
> 
> ...


Writers can absolutely get the very best constructive feedback from other writers (and editors). No doubt. I think the argument being floated in the other thread (or at least my perspective on the issue) is that many authors see no need to go around handing out unsolicited critiques to authors within the "community" in which they publish. Certainly there are authors who choose to do just that, and more power to them I guess. But for me personally, I've got better ways to spend my time.

If someone comes to me and asks for a critique or feedback, I'm happy to provide it. I do not pull punches--bad writing bothers me a lot. It's the unsolicited part that I'm not interested in. Your example of starting a workshop is very different from what was being discussed in that other thread. As you stated, someone would be volunteering their work for critique. All authors should seek critiques of their work, ideally from people who are most qualified to identify strengths and weaknesses. Yes, this would be other authors and editors. Part of publishing is developing a thick skin and accepting criticism. Then growing from it.

Much has been made of the fact that many authors (including myself) have declared themselves uninterested in giving out unsolicited reviews, particularly negative ones. Why? Do I have some obligation to rescue every bad writer from their own lack of skill? Or even to inform them that there is indeed something lacking?

Nobody is advocating lying to bad authors. Nobody is saying that authors shouldn't seek out constructive criticism with the intention of listening with an open mind and hopefully learning something from it. Some of us simply see no need to be the bearer of bad news. We'd rather focus on our own careers than worry about what other people are doing.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> swolf and darlingnovelist--
> 
> you are sooooo off topic at this point, please move on and back to the topic. Further posts about the suit will be removed as being off topic. Thanks.
> 
> ...


Yes, ma'm. I'll come clean, I'm only doing this to avoid working on my novel.

However if he wants to take it off line, I'm willing - contact me at [email protected] )

Camille

_From Betsy: Thanks, Camille. As promised, I removed the part of your post that addressed the suit. _


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> Some of us simply see no need to be the bearer of bad news.


I can certainly understand that viewpoint and at times even hold it myself.

I guess what this and the other thread brought out in me was my sense that the "indie publishing community" for lack of a better word, has the same kind of tribal attitude that it commonly accuses the "traditional publishing community" of having - if you are not part of our group, your view isn't worthwhile and if you are part of our group, you should toe the line and support everyone else in the group.

I'm not saying that writers who choose not to review another writer's work are wrong - far from it. I'm saying the automatic perception that a writer should NOT review another writer's work is the problem.

Of course this thread has gone so far off the original mark that I might not even be addressing the original issue any more.


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> Writers can absolutely get the very best constructive feedback from other writers (and editors). No doubt. I think the argument being floated in the other thread (or at least my perspective on the issue) is that many authors see no need to go around handing out unsolicited critiques to authors within the "community" in which they publish. Certainly there are authors who choose to do just that, and more power to them I guess. But for me personally, I've got better ways to spend my time.


"more power to them I guess" -- is not a rally cry of support for someone who crosses that bridge and choose to write a well thought out but negative critique of a book. My question is: are they entitled to receive the same out pouring of support that Julie received, and why not? Without that attitude firmly in the community people are going to be hesitant to leave negative reviews. The immaturity that Julian has already dealt with is rampant in the human ego without a community that shames the perpetrators of retaliatory behavior you aren't going to have anyone leaving honest and useful reviews.


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> Of course this thread has gone so far off the original mark that I might not even be addressing the original issue any more.


We're up to 11 pages. I started the thread and I have trouble keeping up!


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

CIBond said:


> "more power to them I guess" -- is not a rally cry of support for someone who crosses that bridge and choose to write a well thought out but negative critique of a book. My question is: are they entitled to receive the same out pouring of support that Julie received, and why not? Without that attitude firmly in the community people are going to be hesitant to leave negative reviews. The immaturity that Julian has already dealt with is rampant in the human ego without a community that shames the perpetrators of retaliatory behavior you aren't going to have anyone leaving honest and useful reviews.


I'm sorry, did you need a rally cry of support from me? 

Again, I'm more interested in focusing on my own career than in what others are doing. I could care less if authors review/critique other authors' work. What I didn't/don't care for is the implication that if an author chooses not to give unsolicited reviews to other authors, that they are somehow excusing bad writing, lying, committing a sin of omission, or any of that other nonsense.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> We're up to 11 pages. I started the thread and I have trouble keeping up!


I'm sorry to tell you this, Bards, but I've decided to stop reading your thread. It's very confusing, and there are many tangents, and I just don't feel like it's up to the standards I have for the threads I read. I wish you the best of luck with your future work though, and I look forward to reading threads you make that are better than this one.

Sincerely,
Jason the Thread Reviewer


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> I'm sorry, did you need a rally cry of support from me?
> 
> Again, I'm more interested in focusing on my own career than in what others are doing. I could care less if authors review/critique other authors' work. What I didn't/don't care for is the implication that if an author chooses not to give unsolicited reviews to other authors, that they are somehow excusing bad writing, lying, committing a sin of omission, or any of that other nonsense.


Yes, loud and clear. When I was told that better etiquette would be to send the author my feedback in private, not embarrass them publicly, not put negative things on their Amazon page, that it was unprofessional etc. I think Julie was the only one who hopped up and down and cried "Foul." Tracy said negative feedback was useful. The attitude was that because I was an author different rules applied. You choosing not to leave negative crit is fine, your right entirely, it is a lot of work. Not supporting people who do with guns blazing a huge mistake and it makes Indies seem like spoiled children. It weakens us all, we become a huge joke.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> I'm sorry to tell you this, Bards, but I've decided to stop reading your thread. It's very confusing, and there are many tangents, and I just don't feel like it's up to the standards I have for the threads I read. I wish you the best of luck with your future work though, and I look forward to reading threads you make that are better than this one.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Jason the Thread Reviewer


How dare you review a fellow indie thread creator! You're just jealous that this thread has gotten 11 pages, and none of your own have gotten half this far. My gosh, couldn't you have kept this to a private PM? Shame on you Jason...

David Dalglish
Indie Stereotype.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> How dare you review a fellow indie thread creator! You're just jealous that this thread has gotten 11 pages, and none of your own have gotten half this far. My gosh, couldn't you have kept this to a private PM? Shame on you Jason...
> 
> David Dalglish
> Indie Stereotype.


NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON'T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY REVIEWS I DON'T DO THIS FOR MONEY I'M BROKE MY FEET HURT I CAN SAY WHATEVER I WANT WITHOUT HAVING TO LISTEN TO YOU BAD MOUTH ME WAT ABOUT MY SELF ESTEEM

JASON, IRATE REVIEWER


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks,

As promised, any future posts that reference or respond to the McDonald's discussion will be removed.  However, I am NOT going to go through and delete every off topic post in this thread.  If I did that I'd have to start doing that to a lot of other threads.  Frankly, I have better things to do on a Friday night hanging out here with my hubby.  I hope y'all do, too. 

Seriously, though, at KindleBoards, threads wander around a bit and that's fine.  But if the thread starts to go too far afield, we just rein it in and ask people to move on. Which has been done in this case. This has been a very active thread, which is the reason it's so long...

Carry on!

Betsy


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

foreverjuly said:


> NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON'T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY REVIEWS I DON'T DO THIS FOR MONEY I'M BROKE MY FEET HURT I CAN SAY WHATEVER I WANT WITHOUT HAVING TO LISTEN TO YOU BAD MOUTH ME WAT ABOUT MY SELF ESTEEM
> 
> JASON, IRATE REVIEWER


Gee, Jason...that's so well written! I think I'll buy your book.. 

Betsy


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Now, now, boys. It's all good!









LK
Indie Enabler


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> I'M BROKE MY FEET HURT


You type with your feet?


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Gee, Jason...that's so well written! I think I'll buy your book..
> 
> Betsy


Haha Hmm, let me think about this one:









I guess it's too soon.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

*Looks sternly at Jason*

Let's get back on topic... 

Betsy


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> I guess it's too soon.


Oh god, but it was funny.


----------



## Michael Crane (Jul 22, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> Oh god, but it was funny.


Agreed!  One of my favorite Simpsons moments!

But to get back on topic, I think it's very lame some people behave that way and it really does make the rest of us look bad. Nobody ever wants a bad review, but there are ways to handle it. Swearing and being rude to the reviewer is not one of them, especially when it is an honest review that's not done for malicious reasons.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Now, go make a thread with a poll asking the Indie authors here if they want "special treatment." I seriously doubt you will have any takers, except those few who have been dinged for editing.


Nope. They'll say they want to be treated same as anyone else, too. Until you personally point out their editing issues. Then the insults will fly, and the things you point out as dings will all be turned around to you. You're mean, hyper-critical, stuck-up, etc.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Well. I can tell you with absolute sincerity that I was grateful when a reader pointed out to me that I had "bowel of raspberries" in my book.

eww....


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> Well. I can tell you with absolute sincerity that I was grateful when a reader pointed out to me that I had "bowel of raspberries" in my book.


Ewww, indeed. That beats my best one (which hasn't made it into print - an alpha reader caught it) in which the characters were talking about gangsters and a "heroine shipment." (When I told another friend about it, she said "I could use a good heroine shipment right now. Do they do laundry?")

And then there's the screenplay in which I spelled "brake" as "break" all the way through. It was full of car chases, too. The crazy thing about this is that that first draft reached the finals in a competition, and got a lot of good response from producers, and NOBODY mentioned it. I noticed it myself when I went to do some revisions based on notes.... (Of course, it's Hollywood, there's no reason to believe that any of the people involved could spell - or cared.) That scar on my forehead comes from the banging I did when I realized it.

Yes, please. Do tell me my stupid mistakes, people. (I'm so glad I have a good critique group again, though.)

Camille


----------



## iamstoryteller (Jul 16, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I strongly disagree with this.
> I am a very firm believer in treating all authors equally. By "babying" an Indie author, you are saying that you are not holding them to the higher standards of a Commercially Published author.
> In my reviews, I treat a book as a book. Period. I do not take into account who wrote it, how they published it, whether they are in a wheelchair, or what their living circumstances are.
> "If you wanna play with the big kids, you need to understand that you will be treated like them."
> ...





foreverjuly said:


> Though your point about any book deserving the same standards of judgment is well made, my clown afro and I have this to say about the line above:
> 
> We do?





foreverjuly said:


> NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DONT KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DONT WANT YOU REVIEWING MY REVIEWS I DON'T DO THIS FOR MONEY I'M BROKE MY FEET HURT I CAN SAY WHATEVER I WANT WITHOUT HAVING TO LISTEN TO YOU BAD MOUTH ME WAT ABOUT MY SELF ESTEEM
> 
> JASON, IRATE REVIEWER





LKRigel said:


> Well. I can tell you with absolute sincerity that I was grateful when a reader pointed out to me that I had "bowel of raspberries" in my book.
> 
> eww....





daringnovelist said:


> Ewww, indeed. That beats my best one (which hasn't made it into print - an alpha reader caught it) in which the characters were talking about gangsters and a "heroine shipment." (When I told another friend about it, she said "I could use a good heroine shipment right now. Do they do laundry?")
> 
> And then there's the screenplay in which I spelled "brake" as "break" all the way through. It was full of car chases, too. The crazy thing about this is that that first draft reached the finals in a competition, and got a lot of good response from producers, and NOBODY mentioned it. I noticed it myself when I went to do some revisions based on notes.... (Of course, it's Hollywood, there's no reason to believe that any of the people involved could spell - or cared.) That scar on my forehead comes from the banging I did when I realized it.
> 
> ...


Though not too seriously.... Thanks guys for injecting some levity here. It was past time. 'Course what does it say about me that I read it all? Must be Canadian...


----------



## traceya (Apr 26, 2010)

Wow this thread's gone off topic so many times I've almost forgotten what the topic was - but Julie's OP spoke of authors who were not only behaving childishly, or even just behaving rudely but authors who were aggressive, hostile and threatening. Last time I looked that is actually against the law [shudders to bring law into this again].

When I suggested such authors be 'named and shamed' I wasn't talking about a public 'wall of shame' that could incite a round of litigious behaviour - what I was trying to say, obviously not very well, is that no human being, let alone a supposedly professional author, should be allowed to indiscriminately threaten and harass anyone - be they reviewer or not.

To play around with a well-known quotation 'all it takes for badly behaved/threatening authors to flourish is for good, professional Indie's to stand by and do nothing.'


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I wonder what the legal ramifications of revealing these things would be. I'm pretty sure one of the people at DearAuthor has revealed emails and she's a lawyer, but I have no idea beyond that or under what conditions that could happen. I think we all want our private discussions to be -- private, but I think perhaps people behaving badly specifically because they think no one will tell, even to the point of threats, might be a different matter.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CIBond said:


> "more power to them I guess" -- is not a rally cry of support for someone who crosses that bridge and choose to write a well thought out but negative critique of a book. My question is: are they entitled to receive the same out pouring of support that Julie received, and why not? Without that attitude firmly in the community people are going to be hesitant to leave negative reviews. The immaturity that Julian has already dealt with is rampant in the human ego without a community that shames the perpetrators of retaliatory behavior you aren't going to have anyone leaving honest and useful reviews.


I guess I look at it from the point same point of view as Flannery. There's a big difference between solicited and unsolicited.

Question - would you walk up to a stranger on the street and tell them an outfit accentuates their hips, and not in a good way? Oh, and if they wear vertical pinstripes, it'll make their legs look longer? No? Then what makes it okay online?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I guess I look at it from the point same point of view as Flannery. There's a big difference between solicited and unsolicited.
> 
> Question - would you walk up to a stranger on the street and tell them an outfit accentuates their hips, and not in a good way? Oh, and if they wear vertical pinstripes, it'll make their legs look longer? No? Then what makes it okay online?


To clarify - I "get" that authors are, in essence, putting their work out there - ie. asking "Does this make me look fat?" , but back to my analogy, there's a difference between sending LK a note and saying "Hey, at location blah you put "Bowel of raspberries" instead of "bowl" - that's the equivalent of telling someone they left their zipper down or they have toilet paper stuck to their shoe (I'd want to know!) - and writing out a three-page critique out of the blue.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

CIBond said:


> I posted my review of Asylum and had decidedly mixed support when I used "writer terms." It was suggested that I was arrogant which p*ssed me off.


I don't know if you're referring to me, but I did not say that your review was arrogant. I specifically said I thought it was pretty well done because you clearly recommended the book up front and you prefaced your writing critique with humble comments.

I think it was actually you that said it was arrogant


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I guess I look at it from the point same point of view as Flannery. There's a big difference between solicited and unsolicited.
> 
> Question - would you walk up to a stranger on the street and tell them an outfit accentuates their hips, and not in a good way? Oh, and if they wear vertical pinstripes, it'll make their legs look longer? No? Then what makes it okay online?


A published book is a little different. If you publish something, you're putting it out there, and you have to expect reactions. You don't get to say "no reviews" or "only positive reviews." A politician may not ask for critique of his goofy haircut, but once he throws his hat into the public arena, even his haircut is fair game.

If it's private, sure, it's nobody's business. If you put it out there, you're going to get reactions. Not that you have to like the reactions, and you don't even have to be silent about the reactions (although a wise person will be discrete) - but attacks on the reviewer are out of line.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> A published book is a little different. If you publish something, you're putting it out there, and you have to expect reactions. You don't get to say "no reviews" or "only positive reviews." A politician may not ask for critique of his goofy haircut, but once he throws his hat into the public arena, even his haircut is fair game.
> 
> If it's private, sure, it's nobody's business. If you put it out there, you're going to get reactions. Not that you have to like the reactions, and you don't even have to be silent about the reactions (although a wise person will be discrete) - but attacks on the reviewer are out of line.
> 
> Camille


Meh. You've got a point. I'm still mulling over it. I just think there's a difference between writing a comment on Amazon, writing a 3-page unsolicited critique, and writing a review which was requested by the author. It's a fine line, and I'm probably not explaining it all that well, mostly because this isn't a black and white issue and there are a LOT of shades of gray.

At this point, I think READER reviews (and writers reviewing AS a reader) are fine - solicited or not. Critiques (as written by a fellow author) should not be offered unless asked for. Hopefully that was a bit clearer than mud


----------



## HL Arledge (Sep 5, 2010)

It takes all kinds, I suppose, and they have them in every industry. Honest critique is the only critique worth anything to anyone actually wanting to improve. Those who do not, shouldn't ask for help.

I'm sorry you had to endure that, Julie.

Regards,
HL


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Meh. You've got a point. I'm still mulling over it. I just think there's a difference between writing a comment on Amazon, writing a 3-page unsolicited critique, and writing a review which was requested by the author. It's a fine line, and I'm probably not explaining it all that well, mostly because this isn't a black and white issue and there are a LOT of shades of gray.
> 
> At this point, I think READER reviews (and writers reviewing AS a reader) are fine - solicited or not. Critiques (as written by a fellow author) should not be offered unless asked for. Hopefully that was a bit clearer than mud


I get where you're coming from, totally.

I'll give an example of doing things privately. There's an author who shall rename nameless, but I read this person's book and sent him/her an extensive list of proofreading mistakes. Naturally, this person was really thankful that I'd helped proofread the Kindle edition for free. And this person has become a good friend and ally.

If I'd written those things out in a public Amazon review, the person might've felt, "What an unbelievable d!ck this Moses character is. He just made my book look like it was poorly produced and I wonder what that's going to do to my sales. Screw him. Maybe he needs a "helpful" review on his work ..."


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Meh. You've got a point. I'm still mulling over it. I just think there's a difference between writing a comment on Amazon, writing a 3-page unsolicited critique, and writing a review which was requested by the author. It's a fine line, and I'm probably not explaining it all that well, mostly because this isn't a black and white issue and there are a LOT of shades of gray.
> 
> At this point, I think READER reviews (and writers reviewing AS a reader) are fine - solicited or not. Critiques (as written by a fellow author) should not be offered unless asked for. Hopefully that was a bit clearer than mud


The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested (yes, I know, they almost have to be to get attention, but it's not supposed to be that way - it nudges to the edge of the ethics line). I don't draw a line between readers, writers and journalists. A review is a review and should be up to the reviewer. There must always be a line between the writer and reviewer. The point of a review is to serve the readers, not the writer.

IMHO, if you're friends with a writer, you are better to critique privately than to review them anyway. If you do review, do it with the greatest of care. (I know someone who only reviews on Goodreads when she knows the writer, because she doesn't have to give star ratings - this not only preserves friendships, but maintains some integrity.)

To me, when you write a review, you become a journalist, and your first duty is to the truth.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

:nods:

Oh - I do have to say that, thankfully, EVERY single indie I've commented about on Amazon has been super awesome, even when I've had some "critical" feedback in my review. The authors where I've caught a typo or such and mentioned it to them have all been beyond professional, super courteous, and thankful for me essentially telling them "Oh - by the way..." :leans forward and whispers: "You've got a piece of spinach in your teeth..."



> The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested (yes, I know, they almost have to be to get attention, but it's not supposed to be that way - it nudges to the edge of the ethics line). I don't draw a line between readers, writers and journalists. A review is a review and should be up to the reviewer. There must always be a line between the writer and reviewer. The point of a review is to serve the readers, not the writer.
> 
> IMHO, if you're friends with a writer, you are better to critique privately than to review them anyway. If you do review, do it with the greatest of care. (I know someone who only reviews on Goodreads when she knows the writer, because she doesn't have to give star ratings - this not only preserves friendships, but maintains some integrity.)
> 
> ...


I'm not arguing with you, Camille  I suppose the difference, IMO, is between a review and advice. Unsolicited advice is almost universally frowned upon. A three-page critique, no matter how thoughtfully or carefully done, is advice. You've gone past the line of "I'm a reader and I have a right to review a public work." A review and a critique are not the same thing, IMO. Notice my summation:



> At this point, I think READER reviews (and writers reviewing AS a reader) are fine - solicited or not. Critiques (as written by a fellow author) should not be offered unless asked for.


I clearly said that a review doesn't have to be solicited, but that a critique should be, IMO.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> I make my living as a professional writer. I've sold more than a dozen novels to NY publishers over the last several years and hope to sell another two or three before the year's out. I'm also a trained creativity coach and I work with writers to help improve their craft on a paid basis. I like giving back to writing communities that have helped me in the past (HWA, ITW, etc) and had thought about offering a kind of online workshop here - someone volunteers some of their work, I'd go through it in the same way I do for my paying clients, and everyone else could chime in so we all learned something in the end.
> 
> But you know what?
> 
> ...


I think this is a great idea. Workshops are great and this sounds like it could be educational for many people. On top of that, you'd be asking for a volunteer.

There's a world of difference between this sort of thing and publishing that same critique as an Amazon review.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested ...
> 
> Camille


This is another area where things are in flux. In times when reviewers/critics were on salary with news organizations, this was workable. Bloggers today don't have that support. I don't expect people to buy my book to review it -- how could they possibly afford to pay for so many books?

Just in terms of practicality, isn't it a matter of courtesy and good manners to send a review copy or a coupon to potential reviewers?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

LKRigel said:


> This is another area where things are in flux. In times when reviewers/critics were on salary with news organizations, this was workable. Bloggers today don't have that support. I don't expect people to buy my book to review it -- how could they possibly afford to pay for so many books?
> 
> Just in terms of practicality, isn't it a matter of courtesy and good manners to send a review copy or a coupon to potential reviewers?


It might have helped see my point if you quoted the whole sentence: "The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested (yes, I know, they almost have to be to get attention, but it's not supposed to be that way - it nudges to the edge of the ethics line)."

I agree with you that as a practical matter, that's just the way it works, and frankly it works that way with newspapers now. I give free copies of my book to reviewers too. I was just pointing out that the idea that a review should only come when requested takes an already backdoor policy to extremes.



Arkali said:


> I'm not arguing with you, Camille  I suppose the difference, IMO, is between a review and advice. Unsolicited advice is almost universally frowned upon. A three-page critique, no matter how thoughtfully or carefully done, is advice. You've gone past the line of "I'm a reader and I have a right to review a public work." A review and a critique are not the same thing, IMO. Notice my summation:
> 
> I clearly said that a review doesn't have to be solicited, but that a critique should be, IMO.


One point here that I really agree with: there is a difference between a review and advice, and I have said this before - that people shouldn't treat reviews as critique.

Your ending point leaves me a little confused, though. I think our point of difference may be in how we define the difference. It sounds like you're defining it by contents. I'm defining it by audience and whether the book is public or not. If a book has been published, and the review/critique is posted publicly for the audience of the blog or site where it is posted, then it is NOT a critique. It may sound like one, and as a result be a badly written review, but it's still a review. If it's written with the writer as an audience, and especially if the book is not published, then it's a critique.

I think I understand where you're coming from (if I'm not going off on a complete tangent with this definition thing) in that there are amateur reviewers who can't tell the difference themselves. They write a critique and address it to the writer and then post it to their blog... but, imho, if the book is published, the act of publishing it makes it a review, not a critique. And at that point the author should treat it like a review - well-meaning or not, you have no responsibility to take it seriously. That person has become like all the other bad reviewers out there, whether foolish or snarky or nasty or just plain puzzling.

As writers, we have to accept that there are always going to be hecklers in the audience. And there are also going to be control freaks who will heckle you for your own good. And there will be fans who take the book so much to heart that they CHANGE the book in their heads and get upset with you that you didn't give the hero blue eyes when it's obvious he must have blue eyes....

Critique, of course, is a good way to develop that thick skin and learn to shrug this off. Every writer should spend some time in a writing class or critique group, if only for that purpose. (Although you should get a lot more out of it than that.)

Camille


----------



## RonnellDPorter (Apr 20, 2010)

WOW Julie; talk about poor conduct on their end... My heart goes out to you


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> It might have helped see my point if you quoted the whole sentence: "The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested (yes, I know, they almost have to be to get attention, but it's not supposed to be that way - it nudges to the edge of the ethics line)."
> 
> I agree with you that as a practical matter, that's just the way it works, and frankly it works that way with newspapers now. I give free copies of my book to reviewers too. I was just pointing out that the idea that a review should only come when requested takes an already backdoor policy to extremes.
> 
> Camille


And I agree with you that it's not the best system. I'd be delighted to discover someone had decided to review my work without my asking. I doubt that will happen for a while.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON'T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY REVIEWS I DON'T DO THIS FOR MONEY I'M BROKE MY FEET HURT I CAN SAY WHATEVER I WANT WITHOUT HAVING TO LISTEN TO YOU BAD MOUTH ME WAT ABOUT MY SELF ESTEEM
> 
> JASON, IRATE REVIEWER


Now here's a guy who understands satire.

Now I can't wait to sample the two Powerless books I bought when he won my contest earlier today!


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

RonnellDPorter said:


> WOW Julie; talk about poor conduct on their end... My heart goes out to you


Ronnell: Is that why one of your books it entitled NO HEART? 

Glad to see this thread getting back on track, though. I think it may have veered because we're getting talked out on the OP. It's not like anyone's spoken up and said, "Well, actually, indie authors have a right to be jackinapes."

Nor should they.

Trouble is, we all know that this sort of behavior exists among creative types.

Just watch the audition episodes of any season of American Idol with Simon Cowell on it.

Going in: Oh, I love you Simon.

Coming out, after a rejection: Oh, (#*%Q you, Simon!

I think the Simon Cowells of the world are necessary, though. At some point, someone has to be the person to say, "Sorry. Not good enough."

Talented and mature writers (and singers) know the value of that.

But the Simons (and Julies) of the world are rarely cheered... sadly. They're like the high school teacher you hated because he/she was "so hard on you" but are the ones who ultimately made you be better writers.

And they're only appreciated long after the fact.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> One point here that I really agree with: there is a difference between a review and advice, and I have said this before - that people shouldn't treat reviews as critique.
> 
> Your ending point leaves me a little confused, though. I think our point of difference may be in how we define the difference. It sounds like you're defining it by contents. I'm defining it by audience and whether the book is public or not. If a book has been published, and the review/critique is posted publicly for the audience of the blog or site where it is posted, then it is NOT a critique. It may sound like one, and as a result be a badly written review, but it's still a review. If it's written with the writer as an audience, and especially if the book is not published, then it's a critique.
> 
> I think I understand where you're coming from (if I'm not going off on a complete tangent with this definition thing) in that there are amateur reviewers who can't tell the difference themselves. They write a critique and address it to the writer and then post it to their blog... but, imho, if the book is published, the act of publishing it makes it a review, not a critique. And at that point the author should treat it like a review - well-meaning or not, you have no responsibility to take it seriously. That person has become like all the other bad reviewers out there, whether foolish or snarky or nasty or just plain puzzling.


Meh. This is why I said it's a gray issue. Many shades of gray, too.

Honestly, I don't think the content / audience issue is too far removed. Here's the thing - if you're addressing your commentary (calling it that as review / critique is kind of in the air ) to the readers, do you need to break it down point by point? Is it enough to say "The dialog was stilted in places" or "The characters didn't behave in a way that was believable" or should you go into a point-by-point analysis of how dialogue could be better written and why something didn't work?

While I applaud someone for wanting to "help the author" (I do it myself), at what point does it cross the line into rudeness? As a reviewer, is it your job to help the author _directly_? Critique helps the writer - when you say "You're head-hopping here, and it's confusing, it might work better to do it THIS way" you're critiquing / proffering advice. Reviews help the reader - "This book was confusing in places. The author jumped from one character's perspective to another with no rhyme or reason.".

Now, while the smart writer may take away fresh perspective from a thoughtful review, that wasn't the intent of the reviewer. On the other hand, a smart reader can also glean insight from a critique, but again... the point. Writing a review is the right of anyone who purchased a book. Offering a critique should only be done if you're asked to, IMO - it's offering advice.

Critiques and reviews should both be accepted gracefully, I'm not arguing that. But an unsolicited critique (ie. advice) - well, while I'd still say "thank you", my internal dialogue would be something along the lines of "Who the eff asked you?" I suppose, going back to my "real world" example of talking to a stranger about their clothes...
1) Pointing out typos / grammar / usage - equivalent to telling someone they have a rip in their pants, right across the hiney. Yeah, it's embarrassing, but we should all want to know.
2) Writing a review - Mentioning to a friend "Oh, that's a cute outfit" or "Omigod. She should NOT be wearing spandex!" about someone you see. Of course, this is done out of earshot of the person wearing the spandex 
3) Writing a critique - Walking up to a stranger on the street and then telling them exactly why their outfit works or doesn't, things which would be more slimming, etc. Again, would you walk up to a stranger on the street and do this?

Anyway, I hope I made some sense. It's getting late so I'm rambling. That's my excuse, anyway


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I strongly disagree with this.
> I am a very firm believer in treating all authors equally. By "babying" an Indie author, you are saying that you are not holding them to the higher standards of a Commercially Published author.
> In my reviews, I treat a book as a book. Period. I do not take into account who wrote it, how they published it, whether they are in a wheelchair, or what their living circumstances are.
> "If you wanna play with the big kids, you need to understand that you will be treated like them."
> ...


First, I would like to say that when you put things in quotes like "babying" or "being soft" it suggests that I suggested something of the kind and I did not. And I NEVER suggested anyone be anything but honest. I was simply suggesting that reviewers should be aware that an author who isn't well known will take your review more personally than one who gets lots and lots of reviews and is well known. Why? Because a well known author gets a wider range of opinions. Some reviewers like it, some don't, such is life. But you might literally be the only person reviewing an indie. I may have exaggerated when I said treat it as if you are choking off their income. That may well be a step too far. I admit that. At the same time, I do not appreciate some of the words you attempted to put into my mouth whether your blog is popular or not. I think the term "'special ed' writer'" is, if not offensive, extremely tactless. You can strongly disagree with me (though I don't know if you would have if you hadn't taken my comments the wrong way) but if you are arguing for professionalism, this is a very unprofessional way to do it. A lot of this verges on being personally insulting to me. As for making a poll, I don't know why I would do that. I wasn't arguing for special treatment for indie authors. Just due consideration and respect. So... No. I will not.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

(I'm writing this late at night, so please excuse any sudden lack of familiarity with the mechanics of the English language--or just plain crappy writing)

I've already said my point of view about authors writing critical reviews of other authors' works in places like Amazon, but I think when it comes to book reviewers, such as Red Adept, they have to be honest with their readership and we ought to support them because they're doing us all a favor by taking the inevitable shots that they will take by writing honest reviews. Apparently the indies complain more than the traddies. So indie book reviewers in particular should be greatly appreciated, IMO. They read more junk than other reviewers and they put up with more crap from authors than most reviewers. And they are helping readers to find our works.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

jbh13md said:


> First, I would like to say that when you put things in quotes like "babying" or "being soft" it suggests that I suggested something of the kind and I did not. And I NEVER suggested anyone be anything but honest. I was simply suggesting that reviewers should be aware that an author who isn't well known will take your review more personally than one who gets lots and lots of reviews and is well known. Why? Because a well known author gets a wider range of opinions. Some reviewers like it, some don't, such is life. But you might literally be the only person reviewing an indie. I may have exaggerated when I said treat it as if you are choking off their income. That may well be a step too far. I admit that. At the same time, I do not appreciate some of the words you attempted to put into my mouth whether your blog is popular or not. I think the term "'special ed' writer'" is, if not offensive, extremely tactless. You can strongly disagree with me (though I don't know if you would have if you hadn't taken my comments the wrong way) but if you are arguing for professionalism, this is a very unprofessional way to do it. A lot of this verges on being personally insulting to me. As for making a poll, I don't know why I would do that. I wasn't arguing for special treatment for indie authors. Just due consideration and respect. So... No. I will not.


My apologies if it came across as if you said the things I put in quotes. I did not mean it that way. I also don't think anyone will take it that way as I quoted your entire post along with mine.

Okay, I actually used the term "special ed" writer because of an excuse made to me by an author when I pointed out their spelling/grammatical errors. That author wanted special treatement. That one really ticked me off because my son has a learning disability, so when I told him about it, he said, "What, they wanted to be treated like a special ed writer?" That's because my son strives to make sure that he is treated the same as everyone else. He is taking college classes now and refuses to let his professors know, even if he really could get a little special consideration.

I never said that I wouldn't give Indie authors "due consideration and respect" (see, I'm learning..used the quotes correctly here.  ) I simply meant that they would get the same consideration and respect that I afford Commercial Authors. I don't point Indie authors or single out Indie authors in any way. There books are just books on TBR list, right along with the commercial books.

I honestly wasn't trying to offend you. You just touched on a sore spot with me. As a reviewer, I need to be completely impartial. I can't take anything into account except the book I am reading.

I think your book is on my TBR list. When I get to it, I will not take into account that you are an Indie author. I will not think of this conversation. I will not care what you have said on this forum at all. You could post vulgar comments about me in every forum or post glowing, wonderful things about me on every forum. None of that would matter when I write the review. All that matters is your book.

Again, I am sorry that you took anything I said as a personal insult. It was not meant that way, but I can see why you would take it that way, so it was my error.


----------



## RJ Keller (Mar 9, 2009)

I've noticed that many folks on the internet use quotes to sub for italics in order to show emphasis, because there are so many places online that don't allow for the use of italics. Sometimes it becomes a habit and they do that even in forums, such as this one, where italics are available. That's how I took Red's quotations marks.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

rjkeller said:


> I've noticed that many folks on the internet use quotes to sub for italics in order to show emphasis, because there are so many places online that don't allow for the use of italics. Sometimes it becomes a habit and they do that even in forums, such as this one, where italics are available. That's how I took Red's quotations marks.


That was how I meant to use them. The first forums I ever participated in were the Amazon ones, which don't use italics or any other font stuff. There, I first tried using CAPS, but that looked like I was yelling at people. 

Still, I need to learn to use the italics on here, instead of the quotes. I can certainly see why they would be taken wrong on this forum. When in Rome...


----------



## RJ Keller (Mar 9, 2009)

I do *this* on boards where there are no *italics*. I don't know *why*. Maybe it's because I'm *weird*.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

rjkeller said:


> I do *this* on boards where there are no *italics*. I don't know *why*. Maybe it's because I'm *weird*.


   

Well, I won't argue when it comes to you being "weird".  But, it is a *better* way to *emphasize*.

Speaking of typing in forums: When I type in this little posting box, and get to the bottom of the box, the box won't stay scrolled down. When I get to the bottom, I pretty much have to type while not being able to see what I am typing, as the box just keeps jumping back up. To see what I have typed, I have to use the mouse on the scroll bar. Then, when I click to try to make a correction, it scrolls back up again.

Anyone know how to fix this?


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

CraigInTwinCities said:


> Now here's a guy who understands satire.
> 
> Now I can't wait to sample the two Powerless books I bought when he won my contest earlier today!


I'm glad you got the joke there. I hope you find the books suit your tastes! And thanks again!


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> The thing is, reviews are not supposed to be requested (yes, I know, they almost have to be to get attention, but it's not supposed to be that way - it nudges to the edge of the ethics line). I don't draw a line between readers, writers and journalists. A review is a review and should be up to the reviewer. There must always be a line between the writer and reviewer. The point of a review is to serve the readers, not the writer.
> 
> IMHO, if you're friends with a writer, you are better to critique privately than to review them anyway. If you do review, do it with the greatest of care. (I know someone who only reviews on Goodreads when she knows the writer, because she doesn't have to give star ratings - this not only preserves friendships, but maintains some integrity.)
> 
> ...


I agree 100%. I am dismayed at times when I see writers swapping glowing reviews. It smacks of dishonesty.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

rjkeller said:


> I do *this* on boards where there are no *italics*. I don't know *why*. Maybe it's because I'm *weird*.


That's the way I do it too. If you're *weird* then I'm *weird* too.

I have to say that authors are denying wanting special treatment, but all this and related threads have done is make me think, "I should probably contact these people before I start one of their books to make sure they're not crazy." This is followed by thinking what a pain that would be. Because I review most of what I read, this means I'm going to think two and three times about buying these books. I think when people ask for special treatment, either stating it directly or implying it over several pages, it stops being worth it when there are tons of other authors writing properly edited books and who are professionals.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Am I the only old enough to have been on the internet in the early 90s?

The protocol we all used in the limited character set ascii was _underscores_ for underline and italic and *asterisks* for bold. You will find many email programs will automatically convert these now day (Kinda like the way KB converts smilies into icons.)

The internet, at least, is an excuse. I'm not sure why they've been around on signs for decades, though.
If you imagine it as like "air quotes", well, the results can be pretty funny on a sign. (Here is a link to a favorite blog of mine - The Blog of Unnecessary Quotation Marks http://www.unnecessaryquotes.com/ )

Camille


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Am I the only old enough to have been on the internet in the early 90s?
> 
> The protocol we all used in the limited character set ascii was _underscores_ for underline and italic and *asterisks* for bold. You will find many email programs will automatically convert these now day (Kinda like the way KB converts smilies into icons.)
> 
> ...


LOL, Camille--some funnies on that site.
And no, you're not the only one, I've been on the Internet since it still looked like MS DOS (the movie _War Games_, anyone?), or as I like to say, "since before the Internet had pictures" (and I do believe I used the quotes correctly for that, LOL). Well remember the underlines and asterisks formatting.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Okay, I need to come clean.

Yes, I have been on the internet for ages. I vaguely remember being on some kind of "board" that worked similar to a forum, but I can't remember what it was called. I do remember that it looked like it was done in DOS.

However, my most influential chatting experience comes from playing World of Warcraft. There, I use quotes all the time for empahasis.

Yes. <hangs head> I am a computer gaming nerd.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Okay, I need to come clean.
> 
> Yes, I have been on the internet for ages. I vaguely remember being on some kind of "board" that worked similar to a forum, but I can't remember what it was called. I do remember that it looked like it was done in DOS.
> 
> ...


But did you ever play Warcraft II online? Now that was a game!

Also, did you see the video online of the girl who deleted her boyfriend's character because he was ignoring her, and then he come home, found out, and DESTROYED HIS COMPUTER? It was completely unbelievable. Or about the Korean parents who let their baby die because they were playing WoW? So much craziness.


----------



## rudykerkhoven (Aug 23, 2010)

Quote
NOBODY CARES WAT YOU THINK ANYWAY YOU DON’T KNOW EVERYTHING EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU DO I DON’T WANT YOU REVIEWING MY BOOKS IF YOU CANT JUST READ THE STORY AND IGNORE A FEW TYPOS CAUSE PROFESSIONAL BOOKS HAVE TYPOS TOO AND I BET YOU DON’T BITCH ABOUT THEM.



OK, I'll just admit it.  I think everyone knows it anyhow.  That quote was from me.  I was in a bad mood because my souffle didn't rise and the caps lock key was stuck on while I was typing.  Since then I've learned not to open the oven door too early and that some WD-40 works wonders on a keyboard.  I'm in a better place.  I hope you accept my apology.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

rudykerkhoven said:


> OK, I'll just admit it. I think everyone knows it anyhow. That quote was from me. I was in a bad mood because my souffle didn't rise and the caps lock key was stuck on while I was typing. Since then I've learned not to open the oven door too early and that some WD-40 works wonders on a keyboard. I'm in a better place. I hope you accept my apology.


I'm going to assume that this is a joke, but my sarcasm detector broke, so I'm not sure.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

foreverjuly said:


> But did you ever play Warcraft II online? Now that was a game!
> 
> Also, did you see the video online of the girl who deleted her boyfriend's character because he was ignoring her, and then he come home, found out, and DESTROYED HIS COMPUTER? It was completely unbelievable. Or about the Korean parents who let their baby die because they were playing WoW? So much craziness.


No, I didn't.

My very first gaming experience was some sort of RPG where I had to actually use graph paper to map the dungeons. After that, it was 'Bard's Tale' on the Apple IIgs; that one also required paper. I got into WoW about 3 years ago. I joke and say that I am addicted, but my bf says I'm not really because I do walk away from it for real-life stuff. And, I only just picked it back up about 3 months ago after a 9 month break. I was a guild leader, but got tired of babysitting. 

There are some total crazies out there, though. Do you have the link for the video of the guy?


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I have to say that authors are denying wanting special treatment, but all this and related threads have done is make me think, "I should probably contact these people before I start one of their books to make sure they're not crazy." This is followed by thinking what a pain that would be. Because I review most of what I read, this means I'm going to think two and three times about buying these books. I think when people ask for special treatment, either stating it directly or implying it over several pages, it stops being worth it when there are tons of other authors writing properly edited books and who are professionals.


Exactly! Here are the New Rules&#8230; like New Math, it doesn't actually do anything to add the numbers together because the meat of the subject isn't important just the way it is stated.

1)	I can't say: "the author doesn't control his POV and it is very confusing." Because that might offend someone I have to say: "the author jumps around and I don't know the current perspective because it isn't the same during the entire scene."
2)	I can't review the book if its in the genre I am writing in because that would be a conflict&#8230; you see people with Kindles don't read very much and you can't expect them to read two Romance in a given life time, that would be silly. I know my genre better than any other, I know the rules and conventions and I am better suited to reviewing it but that doesn't matter.
3)	I can't actually review the book because I am an Indy and he is an Indy and it seems like at least 50% of the people here feel that is unprofessional unless I send e-mail first and he approves of the comments.
4)	Once I have comment approval, with a few noted changes and up my star rating I can publish *my* review.

-- Tell me who is going to do all this?

For the people who say the book is published and there is no point now in give the author a critique, that's BS. The line between published and not published is murky here. It is very easy to make a few corrections and put out a new copy of the book. Lots of people do it, I am doing it, I talked to one author who has 12 books out and he is doing it so "published" doesn't mean the same thing as it does for paper books. It would be useful if Amazon versioned the reviews but since everything I see is 4/5 stars that isn't important.

Many of us are amateurs, and the work that I have seen in general isn't as good as most published books, the bulk, as in the average, as in if you chose randomly here verses randomly at a bookstore. If you disagree please tell me which publisher is beating down your door to put your book into print? *sarcasm here* Me neither, the best I got was a personal rejection telling me that my work needed polish. Great, that's clear. 

So given how easy it is to update a copy of the book, given the quality and experience of the people writing&#8230; I am baffled by the desire to stifle any feedback that might make people better writers. Are you planning on only writing one book in your whole life?
When you buy a used car do you bring someone to help pick the color or do you bring your friend who is also a mechanic? Would you expect the person selling the used car to shake his head and say, "No fare bringing in a ringer, its rude!"



Arkali said:


> Critiques and reviews should both be accepted gracefully, I'm not arguing that. But an unsolicited critique (ie. advice) - well, while I'd still say "thank you", my internal dialogue would be something along the lines of "Who the eff asked you?" I suppose, going back to my "real world" example of talking to a stranger about their clothes...
> &#8230;
> 3) Writing a critique - Walking up to a stranger on the street and then telling them exactly why their outfit works or doesn't, things which would be more slimming, etc. Again, would you walk up to a stranger on the street and do this?


Nope, that comparison doesn't work. Why, because books you buy are two things, time and money spent on reading the authors work. It isn't the same as seeing a stranger on the street. You have invested in his story telling ability. If you said, "hey you can have this if you want" and I started to read it and stopped then I would have ended my time investment and no $$ would have changed hands - That would be a "who the eff asked me?" When you charged me $$ to buy the book, at that point it became a product and I - the purchaser of said product, get to review it because I gave you my resource in trade and it turned out to be defective. The same as a shirt with a hole, a cracked engine block, etc. That is the line between a free book and a book for sale. If you think feedback on a product you sold is rude then give them away for free. In this case you want the etiquette required of someone receiving a gift but also the monetary exchange and professionalism that comes with selling your work. Which one do you want more?


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Arkali said:


> 1) Pointing out typos / grammar / usage - equivalent to telling someone they have a rip in their pants, right across the hiney. Yeah, it's embarrassing, but we should all want to know.
> 2) Writing a review - Mentioning to a friend "Oh, that's a cute outfit" or "Omigod. She should NOT be wearing spandex!" about someone you see. Of course, this is done out of earshot of the person wearing the spandex
> 3) Writing a critique - Walking up to a stranger on the street and then telling them exactly why their outfit works or doesn't, things which would be more slimming, etc. Again, would you walk up to a stranger on the street and do this?


I think I see your point here. I, of course, always do the first two, with more detail than described, though.  I do try to avoid doing the third one. I rarely mention what/how the author could have done better. If I do, I think it's from a reader perspective, as in "I would have enjoyed that character more had he/she been nicer."


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

rjkeller said:


> I do *this* on boards where there are no *italics*. I don't know *why*. Maybe it's because I'm *weird*.


See I use * * only when denoting action, *creeping out from the shadows* so seeing it for italics is odd to me.

Oh, and to misquote from Alice in Wonderland, I'm weird, You're weird, we're all weird. (Or is that from Rocky Horror?)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CIBond said:


> Nope, that comparison doesn't work. Why, because books you buy are two things, time and money spent on reading the authors work. It isn't the same as seeing a stranger on the street. You have invested in his story telling ability. If you said, "hey you can have this if you want" and I started to read it and stopped then I would have ended my time investment and no $$ would have changed hands - That would be a "who the eff asked me?" When you charged me $$ to buy the book, at that point it became a product and I - the purchaser of said product, get to review it because I gave you my resource in trade and it turned out to be defective. The same as a shirt with a hole, a cracked engine block, etc. That is the line between a free book and a book for sale. If you think feedback on a product you sold is rude then give them away for free. In this case you want the etiquette required of someone receiving a gift but also the monetary exchange and professionalism that comes with selling your work. Which one do you want more?


I never said you can't or shouldn't review a book you have read. In fact, I said (repeatedly) that it is EVERY reader's right to do so, regardless of whether or not they also happen to be a writer. I also have said that there is a HUGE difference between a review and a critique. It has nothing to do with whether the feedback is critical or favorable, either, it has to do with who you are "helping". If your feedback is designed primarily to help the reader, it's a review. If it's primarily to "help" the writer it's a critique and potentially unsolicited advice. Some people can't tell the difference between the two.



> I think I see your point here. I, of course, always do the first two, with more detail than described, though. Wink I do try to avoid doing the third one. I rarely mention what/how the author could have done better. If I do, I think it's from a reader perspective, as in "I would have enjoyed that character more had he/she been nicer."


Exactly! I've sent several authors a quick note to point out "I really enjoyed your book. I noticed on location 4593 that you've got a loose/lose error, though. Hope you don't mind that I pointed it out, but just wanted to let you know." Every single time I've gotten back a thank you and had a very nice interaction with the writer. Note: I'm not just saying I enjoyed the book to be polite. If I didn't, I wouldn't have kept reading, and I certainly wouldn't be taking the time to write the author 

I've also had some really good interaction with authors about what I thought of the story, things that bugged me, etc. In fact, I wrote a brief review of Dave Conifer's eBully on Amazon and Dave and I had a pretty good chat about why I didn't like the ending. Apparently this was something he'd had issues with when he was writing it and a couple of other people had voiced the same complaint. Dave actually changed the ending because of feedback he received. I did not, however, go into a detailed point-by-point dissertation of his work nor would I without being asked.

There's a line is all I'm saying. A review, in my opinion, should primarily detail what you enjoyed about a book and what detracted from your enjoyment. A critique, on the other hand, addresses the craft of writing and unless you've been asked it really isn't your place to offer (unless asked), no matter how well-intentioned.

----
Totally doing a 180 - I do :to denote action: and *to add italics* and TO BOLD. Kinda funny


----------



## rudykerkhoven (Aug 23, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I'm going to assume that this is a joke, but my sarcasm detector broke, so I'm not sure.


Perhaps there should be a sarcasm marker when writing messages. Maybe *s* or something.

And I was joking. My caps lock key works perfectly fine.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

Arkali said:


> ---
> Totally doing a 180 - I do :to denote action: and *to add italics* and TO BOLD. Kinda funny


We should do a poll!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

rudykerkhoven said:


> Perhaps there should be a sarcasm marker when writing messages. Maybe *s* or something.
> 
> And I was joking. My caps lock key works perfectly fine.


LOL Sadly, I still can't tell - were you or weren't you the guy that sent the note - that is the question  Oh - and smilies work just fine 



> We should do a poll!


We totally should!


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> My apologies if it came across as if you said the things I put in quotes. I did not mean it that way. I also don't think anyone will take it that way as I quoted your entire post along with mine.
> 
> Okay, I actually used the term "special ed" writer because of an excuse made to me by an author when I pointed out their spelling/grammatical errors. That author wanted special treatement. That one really ticked me off because my son has a learning disability, so when I told him about it, he said, "What, they wanted to be treated like a special ed writer?" That's because my son strives to make sure that he is treated the same as everyone else. He is taking college classes now and refuses to let his professors know, even if he really could get a little special consideration.
> 
> ...


I understand where you're coming from. I'm a bit sensitive when it comes to the issue of dyslexia and people being put down because they're dyslexic. When I was in college I also refused to be involved in any program labeled LD because I am dyslexic, not learning disabled. People who are dyslexic, as I'm sure you know from your experience with your son, learn differently. They do not learn worse.

Frankly, I was just surprised by the reaction, but, again, I'll admit some of what I said was a little too strong and thus confusing in a way that might have seemed to say something like, "Indies have it hard so you should give them good reviews no matter how bad their books are." I just want to make it very clear that I do not believe that. AND BEFORE ANYONE REPLIES THAT LOTS OF INDIE BOOKS ARE GOOD: YES! I KNOW THAT ALREADY! PLEASE TAKE MY COMMENTS IN CONTEXT!  I have read your blog and I respect your objectivity. I know you treat all authors impartially (as far as I've seen... I haven't read the ENTIRE blog). I didn't think you were actually trying to offend me, but I honestly did not intend to argue for special treatment of any kind for indie authors. I don't expect it myself, I have never wanted it, I have never asked for it, I have never gotten it, and I agree that your reputation as a reviewer would suffer if you pointed out indies for softball reviews. Anyway. I feel like I'm arguing that I wasn't arguing something at length... And that strikes me as a waste of time. If you do read my book, Red, I hope you enjoy it, but, if you don't, you won't get any insane feedback from me. Because I'm a grownup and I take my reputation seriously too.


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Arkali said:


> There's a line is all I'm saying. A review, in my opinion, should primarily detail what you enjoyed about a book and what detracted from your enjoyment. A critique, on the other hand, addresses the craft of writing and unless you've been asked it really isn't your place to offer (unless asked), no matter how well-intentioned.


I should have been more clear, it's the "asked" that I object to. If I paid $$ for your work I don't need to be "asked" to do a critique, a review, a critique/review, a poem, a song, an interpretive dance. It is my right to communicate any way I like, whether I use writer terms or dumb it down, whether I make suggestions or don't. The "who the eff asked you?" attitude isn't justified with an etiquette argument because I bought the book. I read like a writer, I am a reader/writer. So the observations I make are from a writer's perspective. If you wrote a novel about some topic and got some facts wrong would it be rude for someone in the field to point them out? To make suggestions about how to fix your errors? It would be a gift, one you can choose to ignore without any disrespect on your part as well, I might add. But it is not outside the bounds of etiquette for someone to offer them. What's the saying? Opinions are like __ we all have them.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

jbh13md said:


> I understand where you're coming from. I'm a bit sensitive when it comes to the issue of dyslexia and people being put down because they're dyslexic. When I was in college I also refused to be involved in any program labeled LD because I am dyslexic, not learning disabled. People who are dyslexic, as I'm sure you know from your experience with your son, learn differently. They do not learn worse.


My son is not actually dyslexic; he has dysgraphia, which is a form of dyslexia, but only affects written language. By that I mean, he can read just fine, but his spelling, punctuation and capitalization skills are extremely poor. When he was seven, one teacher implied that he was retarded and needed a "special school". Yes, she said it as if it were in quotes. LOL Later, he did attend a "special ed" class. To be honest, it did him no good whatsoever, but that was because the school had so experience with his specific problem. So, yes, he and I can both get a bit sensitive about it. However, he wants to write and publish a book someday. No doubt, he will have me editing it, as I do for his college papers. 

Sorry, my use of the term was a bit out of context the first time. I think when I get to typing, I forget that people reading it are not privy to my inside family jokes.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

rudykerkhoven said:


> Perhaps there should be a sarcasm marker when writing messages. Maybe *s* or something.
> 
> And I was joking. My caps lock key works perfectly fine.


I've actually thought about doing something like this because nobody seems to understand when I'm joking around here. Like I'd have an * at the end and in my signature it would say= *means it's a joke. But that would just ruin the whole thing.


----------



## farrellclaire (Mar 5, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> I've actually thought about doing something like this because nobody seems to understand when I'm joking around here. Like I'd have an * at the end and in my signature it would say= *means it's a joke. But that would just ruin the whole thing.


If it's any consolation, you always make me laugh.

Explaining it's a joke would wash away the funnies.

*Nods* Ah, denotes action indeed.


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> My son is not actually dyslexic; he has dysgraphia, which is a form of dyslexia, but only affects written language. By that I mean, he can read just fine, but his spelling, punctuation and capitalization skills are extremely poor. When he was seven, one teacher implied that he was retarded and needed a "special school". Yes, she said it as if it were in quotes. LOL Later, he did attend a "special ed" class. To be honest, it did him no good whatsoever, but that was because the school had so experience with his specific problem. So, yes, he and I can both get a bit sensitive about it. However, he wants to write and publish a book someday. No doubt, he will have me editing it, as I do for his college papers.
> 
> Sorry, my use of the term was a bit out of context the first time. I think when I get to typing, I forget that people reading it are not privy to my inside family jokes.


I didn't have a great experience with special ed and LD classes and tutoring either. However, it did make me appreciate reading a lot more and I'm thankful for that. From what I understand, the field has improved a lot since I was in school. At that time (and perhaps because I lived in a fairly rural area of Ohio), most of my teachers didn't understand the difference between dyslexia and the more profound forms of being developmentally challenged. I was called retarded by more than one adult I still believe should have known better. If your son does decide to write a book and he likes fantasy, I really recommend Piers Anthony's autobiography "Bio of an Ogre." He was dyslexic too and he's a writer I really look up to.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> My son is not actually dyslexic; he has dysgraphia, which is a form of dyslexia, but only affects written language. By that I mean, he can read just fine, but his spelling, punctuation and capitalization skills are extremely poor. When he was seven, one teacher implied that he was retarded and needed a "special school". Yes, she said it as if it were in quotes. LOL Later, he did attend a "special ed" class. To be honest, it did him no good whatsoever, but that was because the school had so experience with his specific problem. So, yes, he and I can both get a bit sensitive about it. However, he wants to write and publish a book someday. No doubt, he will have me editing it, as I do for his college papers.
> 
> Sorry, my use of the term was a bit out of context the first time. I think when I get to typing, I forget that people reading it are not privy to my inside family jokes.


I have mild dysgraphia. I reverse letters and sometimes even misspell simple words like "the". Luckily, it's mild enough to be more annoying than debilitating.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

foreverjuly said:


> But did you ever play Warcraft II online? Now that was a game!
> 
> Also, did you see the video online of the girl who deleted her boyfriend's character because he was ignoring her, and then he come home, found out, and DESTROYED HIS COMPUTER? It was completely unbelievable. Or about the Korean parents who let their baby die because they were playing WoW? So much craziness.


The Korean couple were playing a game called Prius. There was a woman in Britain (I think) so obsessed with Small Worlds that she not only neglected her three children, but let the dogs starve to death. I mean, I've had my moments, but please.

I used to play WoW, but after getting camped in an alleged neutral zone as a pathetic lvl 20, I wondered why I wanted to spend my time in a world(s) full of jerks.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2010)

farrellclaire said:


> If it's any consolation, you always make me laugh.
> 
> Explaining it's a joke would wash away the funnies.
> 
> *Nods* Ah, denotes action indeed.


As long as people like you get it, that makes it all worth it.*

*not a joke


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Monique said:


> I have mild dysgraphia. I reverse letters and sometimes even misspell simple words like "the". Luckily, it's mild enough to be more annoying than debilitating.


My son's was pretty severe as a child. However, he has learned to work around it, so it's much better these days.

He says he likes online chatting because people think his spelling problem is just typos.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> My son's was pretty severe as a child. However, he has learned to work around it, so it's much better these days.
> 
> He says he likes online chatting because people think his spelling problem is just typos.


That's good to hear.

And, yeah, typos!


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

CIBond said:


> In this case you want the etiquette required of someone receiving a gift but also the monetary exchange and professionalism that comes with selling your work. Which one do you want more?


This is why I pay for books. I will consider suggested reading by an author, but if I'm interested I will sample or purchase it. I don't want to be beholden -- no, that's wrong -- I don't want _the writer_ to think I'm beholden either be read the thing by a certain date or review it.


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

I would like to point out that a week ago my 3.5 year old son advised me:  “It’s not good to poop on the floor.”

This was, and still is, sound advice.  Not exactly topical as I haven’t done this for many years however, for him it was good advice and that’s the way I took it.  I didn’t get upset because of its implication, I considered that the advice was well intended and came from someone who thought it might be of use and ... maybe in 45 years it will be?


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

farrellclaire said:


> Explaining it's a joke would wash away the funnies.


It really does, and yet to not indicate it in most circles is begging for trouble. I was on a message board and the discussion was about an autism fund raiser Jon Stewart hosted. (I think it was called Night of Too Many stars.) The event had an auction and some of the comedians auctioned off services like holding someone's hand and moaning their name like they're having a "happy" (Steve Carell) or telling of an ex, complete with off-colored words (Chris Rock.) There were people saying it was a shame about comedians swearing or not coming up with family friendly things. I sorta went into character and started talking about how Uncle Miltie never had to do that stuff, gee willikers, and just being over the top prudish. (Not that I don't appreciate people who really felt it could be more sedate.) I tried to exaggerate and be absurd to the point that it would seem to be impossible to miss I was being satirical -- and people still asked.

So, yeah.

I just think that if you do this stuff you either have to lose half the joke by tipping your hat or prepare to have people misunderstand. In the case here, the original -- real -- words really were over-the-top bug-house and so it would be hard to parody and go a step beyond, and so I actually do see the confusion.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I just think that if you do this stuff you either have to lose half the joke by tipping your hat or prepare to have people misunderstand. In the case here, the original -- real -- words really were over-the-top bug-house and so it would be hard to parody and go a step beyond, and so I actually do see the confusion.


Heh. My confusion was because I was thinking - "Wait - are you REALLY the guy who wrote the first email, and if so, do you really think that's a good excuse / apology?" Then, another part of my brain was saying "No, you dolt, he's just making a funny."


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CIBond said:


> I should have been more clear, it's the "asked" that I object to. If I paid $$ for your work I don't need to be "asked" to do a critique, a review, a critique/review, a poem, a song, an interpretive dance. It is my right to communicate any way I like, whether I use writer terms or dumb it down, whether I make suggestions or don't. The "who the eff asked you?" attitude isn't justified with an etiquette argument because I bought the book. I read like a writer, I am a reader/writer. So the observations I make are from a writer's perspective. If you wrote a novel about some topic and got some facts wrong would it be rude for someone in the field to point them out? To make suggestions about how to fix your errors? It would be a gift, one you can choose to ignore without any disrespect on your part as well, I might add. But it is not outside the bounds of etiquette for someone to offer them. What's the saying? Opinions are like __ we all have them.


If I wrote a book about frogs, for instance, and I messed up FACTS, then obviously it's not rude to point them out. That falls right in there with typos and other errors. I have never once said that this was rude, and for you to imply that I did is a bit of a straw man.

Look, I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall and I am about :this far: from saying that you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. However, I'll make one last attempt to get point across. As a reader, it's absolutely your right to write a review, nor should it be thought of as rude if you didn't like some aspect for whatever reason. However, a review's purpose is to tell others what you liked and didn't like about a particular product.

A critique, on the other hand - ie. offering to help someone "fix" their perceived errors... Well, certainly you are within your rights to do that, too. But you shouldn't be surprised if not everyone is falling over themselves in gratitude, even if they do say "Thank you."


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Arkali said:


> A critique, on the other hand - ie. offering to help someone "fix" their perceived errors... Well, certainly you are within your rights to do that, too. But you shouldn't be surprised if not everyone is falling over themselves in gratitude, even if they do say "Thank you."


Bah. I couldn't care less about gratitude, but harassment is a different issue entirely. The only good thing about a book you didn't like is that it makes you think about your craft. Makes other people think as well. I am grateful for the opportunity to improve my own writing and chew over my thoughts on the subject of what *didn't* work for me, other people can e-mail me or the writer can comment that I am insane and if he did X then what about Y. Some writers might agree and value my insight and others might be offended. If I operate on the theory that no one should ever get offended I wouldn't end up learning much and meeting other's who share my passion for the craft. I can dislike the book, the author can dislike my feedback as long as we stay civil it all works.


----------



## JoeMitchell (Jun 6, 2010)

I can't spell the word yesterday without first spelling it 'yeasterday' and then going back to remove the a.  I have no idea how this habit developed, but it's always cropping up.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

JoeMitchell said:


> I can't spell the word yesterday without first spelling it 'yeasterday' and then going back to remove the a. I have no idea how this habit developed, but it's always cropping up.


Yeasterday, I baked bread at the break of day.
Those stupid chickens wouldn't lay.
Now it looks as though my nerves might fray.
Oh, yeasterday, was eggy free.

Why'd I bake those rolls,
I don't know, I cannot say. 
I wrote this stupid song, now I long for yeaster-da-da-ay.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

CIBond said:


> Bah. I couldn't care less about gratitude, but harassment is a different issue entirely. The only good thing about a book you didn't like is that it makes you think about your craft. Makes other people think as well. I am grateful for the opportunity to improve my own writing and chew over my thoughts on the subject of what *didn't* work for me, other people can e-mail me or the writer can comment that I am insane and if he did X then what about Y. Some writers might agree and value my insight and others might be offended. If I operate on the theory that no one should ever get offended I wouldn't end up learning much and meeting other's who share my passion for the craft. I can dislike the book, the author can dislike my feedback as long as we stay civil it all works.


Yes. You're making the point I was trying to make (although I was trying to express it from the receiving end).

It's a reviewer's duty to say what they honestly feel in the manner that suits them. Trying to put limits on that is a very very bad idea. Real literary criticism - the serious stuff, the stuff we should all be so lucky as to have applied to our books - is all about craft.

When we talk about what a reviewer should and should not do, IMHO, there are two rules 1) Be Honest 2) Draw a line between you and the writer.

Camille


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

RedAdept said:


> He says he likes online chatting because people think his spelling problem is just typos.


*** SORRY OT post****
I call this "typoglycemia"

I really try to watch for it when I am posting here on KB because it used to be a very bad problem for me. I have stated I played an MMORPG for 7 or 8 years. I learned early on to type VERY Fast if I wanted to talk in complete sentences and not stupid shorthand. I had to type in 3 second bursts, (the time between actions I had to take) and I could sometimes be in up to 12 conversations at a time, so typos and mistells (sending a message to one person when you meant to send it to another) were my forte. I was known as the Queen of Mistells among my friends, BUT I was also known around my server as one of the best of my class, and one of the only ones who ever talked much at all because my class was such a hard one to be good at AND be able to type.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> To whoever it was that suggested a critique group - I would sign up and volunteer in a heartbeat. My genre isn't terribly popular right now, and with the economy down, I'm not getting many sales (and therefore very little feedback). I'm doing okay, but my first book is outselling my second one by oodles and bunches, and I would like to know why. Either the second book sucks, or all the people who bought the first book thought it sucked (even though most told me otherwise). Okay, maybe it's because the economy is down. Still, point I'm trying to make here is that you have a volunteer right here *points to self* if you want to do the critique group, and I promise I won't stomp my feet or cry to mommy (mods) if someone tells me something and it is brutal.


You do mystery, right? (Your covers look a little horror-ish, and I haven't kept track of who writes what, so I'm not sure.)

I'm a little swamped catching up with my critique group right now, but I am interested in overall adding some more mystery writer's to my circle of alpha/beta readers. And there are probably all sorts of others looking to match up. Why not start a thread on the critique idea and people can bat the idea around. (And it will give me some place to come back to when I'm ready. I'll never remember this topic as the one where we talked about critique.

Actually my group might be interested in adding members. It's on Yahoo group, and it's got some oddball rules to keep people working - minimum of three chapter crits and one chapter posted each month. Some of them don't read old chapters before critting new ones, but most try to catch the book from the start. I really hate the slow pace this can enforce. But it is good to have such a group. Let me know if you are interested.

Camille


----------



## G. Henkel (Jan 12, 2010)

Julie,

Sorry I noticed this thread too late, now that it has been completely derailed, but I wanted to say that I completely agree with you. I had a similar experience with an indie author whose book I bought - at $9.99 no less - and in which every page was riddled with typos and errors. I contacted the author, mentioned the problems and offered to send a detailed list of problems and got as a response a very feisty [email protected]@-it-is-a-matter-of-taste-and-your-taste-obviously-sucks-because-I-am-perfect email. Weird - and sad - as it may sound, it seems to me that this is not the only author who believes grammar and spelling rules are a matter of taste.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

RedAdept said:


> Well, I won't argue when it comes to you being "weird".  But, it is a *better* way to *emphasize*.
> 
> Speaking of typing in forums: When I type in this little posting box, and get to the bottom of the box, the box won't stay scrolled down. When I get to the bottom, I pretty much have to type while not being able to see what I am typing, as the box just keeps jumping back up. To see what I have typed, I have to use the mouse on the scroll bar. Then, when I click to try to make a correction, it scrolls back up again.
> 
> Anyone know how to fix this?


I believe it is an artifact/forum software bug that appears when threads get very long. Have you tried increasing the size of the posting box? In at least one of my browsers on my desktop system (and it's the middle of the night and I'm on the iPad so I can't check) I can click and drag on the lower right hand corner of the posting box to enlarge the box. There are some little diagonal lines across that corner of the box. I saw them and tried it in either Chrome or Firefox, can't remember which...

Betsy


----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

brickwallwriter said:


> I agree
> 
> Your 'threat' is kind of like what they (finally) do here in Ohio with people who drink and drive
> They are issued a bright yellow license plate so that EVERYONE knows that they CANNOT handle their liquor
> ...


Wow... That is just insane. I can't see how that is constitutional in anyway. Law's like that just piss me off. I swear, if I had a fortune I would spend it all removing such anti American crap that people get put on the books.... rant over.


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

I frequently see [/s] or /s meaning "end of sarcasm" after a snarky comment.


----------



## Steve Silkin (Sep 15, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> Yeasterday, I baked bread at the break of day.
> Those stupid chickens wouldn't lay.


That's funny because I've read that Paul first wrote the song using the syllables 'Scram-bled Eggs' instead of 'Yes-ter-day.'


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Steve Silkin said:


> That's funny because I've read that Paul first wrote the song using the syllables 'Scram-bled Eggs' instead of 'Yes-ter-day.'


Yep, I've read that too.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Yes. You're making the point I was trying to make (although I was trying to express it from the receiving end).
> 
> It's a reviewer's duty to say what they honestly feel in the manner that suits them. Trying to put limits on that is a very very bad idea. Real literary criticism - the serious stuff, the stuff we should all be so lucky as to have applied to our books - is all about craft.
> 
> ...


I agree with points one and two 

At the same time, I suppose I just feel like it's the reviewers job to say what they liked and didn't like about the book, but not necessarily how to make it better. It's a fine line - obviously, if I didn't like the pacing of a book and say so, that's in some ways telling a writer how to improve it. On the other hand, should I then go through and say "Well, if the writer removed these paragraphs (and specified the paragraphs) it would make these two scenes flow better." I tend to think that's crossing the line for a review, and that most readers aren't going to care about that sort of thing. There's a difference between a reviewer and an editor, IMO.


----------



## Guest (Oct 24, 2010)

Want to know how to stop Canadian bacon from curling in the frying pan? Take away its little broom.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> Want to know how to stop Canadian bacon from curling in the frying pan? Take away its little broom.


 That's cute


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I agree with points one and two
> 
> At the same time, I suppose I just feel like it's the reviewers job to say what they liked and didn't like about the book, but not necessarily how to make it better. It's a fine line - obviously, if I didn't like the pacing of a book and say so, that's in some ways telling a writer how to improve it. On the other hand, should I then go through and say "Well, if the writer removed these paragraphs (and specified the paragraphs) it would make these two scenes flow better." I tend to think that's crossing the line for a review, and that most readers aren't going to care about that sort of thing. There's a difference between a reviewer and an editor, IMO.


Funny, but I was just looking at the best critiquers I know... and I was thinking the same thing about critique. Yes, some critiquers just express themselves better by saying what they would have done - and you have to express things the way you can - but the best ones actually hold up a mirror to your work so you can see what's going on for yourself. Because only you know what you meant to do. When you rewrite someone's story in crititque, though, it doesn't help them with the story - it just helps them learn some principles. And the reason is because the critiquer's goal is not going to be the same as the writer's goal.

To me there's no line for a review. The review isn't about me. It's about the reviewer and the reader. The only thing I see wrong with that kind of review is that it really doesn't serve the reader very well. It's boring blather in terms of the reader. But it's no different than any other boring blather.

Camille


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

If you write, you have another level on which you can understand the text and story-telling. I think that reviews on Amazon are best done while wearing an (informed) reader hat. There's no way you can divorce yourself from the writer part of you, and should use the knowledge, but the actual review is best when it's from the part of you simply looking for a good story. Being a writer can pinpoint why the book might have failed and makes reviewing easier, but I still believe these things are ultimately reader talking to reader. 

Writing is a dominant thing. Reading is a more passive thing, at least a receptive thing. You can read actively and intelligently, but you aren't the boss. The review is a discussion on how well the writer fulfilled for you his or her part of the bargain to entertain or inform. When working with the author, there is definitely an opportunity to really analyze the work and just into a more active role, but that's not the role -- imo -- of an Amazon or book-site-for-readers review. If a writer seeks out a review, I do feel they're asking the person to be a more involved participant though, at least behind the scenes. 

It's always going to be a little tougher to be told by someone with their I Write Too Hat on how the book should have been written -- especially if the result would be an entirely different book. I get why authors might on occasion be upset. I think we all have choices though in how we respond and what we take away from the experience.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> If you write, you have another level on which you can understand the text and story-telling. I think that reviews on Amazon are best done while wearing an (informed) reader hat. There's no way you can divorce yourself from the writer part of you, and should use the knowledge, but the actual review is best when it's from the part of you simply looking for a good story. Being a writer can pinpoint why the book might have failed and makes reviewing easier, but I still believe these things are ultimately reader talking to reader.
> 
> Writing is a dominant thing. Reading is a more passive thing, at least a receptive thing. You can read actively and intelligently, but you aren't the boss. The review is a discussion on how well the writer fulfilled for you his or her part of the bargain to entertain or inform. When working with the author, there is definitely an opportunity to really analyze the work and just into a more active role, but that's not the role -- imo -- of an Amazon or book-site-for-readers review. If a writer seeks out a review, I do feel they're asking the person to be a more involved participant though, at least behind the scenes.
> 
> It's always going to be a little tougher to be told by someone with their I Write Too Hat on how the book should have been written -- especially if the result would be an entirely different book. I get why authors might on occasion be upset. I think we all have choices though in how we respond and what we take away from the experience.


Five stars. Pretty much what I've been (trying) to say, but much you phrased it much more eloquently.


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

I'm loving the discussion on review vs. critique. IMO, a review's target audience is other readers, as in "If you also read this book, you may or may not like...". A critique's target audience is the writer: "Issues I saw with the book's construction are..."

Personally, I would not say no to an unsolicited critique, because I'm interested in improving my technique. I do think there is a wider range of unsolicited critique types, though, and I'd probably haul out my handy-dandy grain of salt when perusing its suggestions.

As for a critique being posted with other reviews, that falls into the target audience issue. Putting it in public where readers will all see it might result in it not reaching its target audience, the author (at least not in a way they may prefer, thus making them less receptive to the message), and will in fact deliver it to a lot of people who probably aren't interested in that level of detail. Double fail.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Jasmine Giacomo said:


> I'm loving the discussion on review vs. critique. IMO, a review's target audience is other readers, as in "If you also read this book, you may or may not like...". A critique's target audience is the writer: "Issues I saw with the book's construction are..."
> 
> Personally, I would not say no to an unsolicited critique, because I'm interested in improving my technique. I do think there is a wider range of unsolicited critique types, though, and I'd probably haul out my handy-dandy grain of salt when perusing its suggestions.
> 
> As for a critique being posted with other reviews, that falls into the target audience issue. Putting it in public where readers will all see it might result in it not reaching its target audience, the author (at least not in a way they may prefer, thus making them less receptive to the message), and will in fact deliver it to a lot of people who probably aren't interested in that level of detail. Double fail.


Yes, yes, and yes.

P.S.: Would you happen to have a spare grain of salt? I'm constantly misplacing mine


----------



## 4dprefect (Oct 18, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> You mean the drunk driving thing - the yellow license plate? I don't know. As someone whose family (father, mother, sister) was massacred by a drunk driver, I have no problem with it. If you drive drunk, you give up the right to privacy - my opinion. I'm not talking about buzzed driving, but well over the limit drunk.
> 
> I know, off topic, but I just couldn't let that pass.


Drunk drivers are murderers. If they don't happen to find a victim, it's purely by chance.

SAF


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

T.L. Haddix said:


> You mean the drunk driving thing - the yellow license plate? I don't know. As someone whose family (father, mother, sister) was massacred by a drunk driver, I have no problem with it. If you drive drunk, you give up the right to privacy - my opinion. I'm not talking about buzzed driving, but well over the limit drunk.
> 
> I know, off topic, but I just couldn't let that pass.


I agree 100%. As a nation, we baby our criminals way too much.

To me, this is no different from putting a rapist on the "Registered Sex Offenders" list.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

-License plate topic- when we lived in Okinawa from '96-'99 they put stickers on the cars instead of changing license plates. Kinda an upside down teardrop shape iirc, that was split in 2 lengthwise and the 2 sides were like blue & yellow, or red & white, or something... but anyway, the point is, they weren't for drunks, but one color set was for drivers who had possessed their licenses for under a year, so you knew they were new drivers, and the other color set was for the very old drivers (like 85+). There has been more than one time since coming back to the States that I have wished we had something similar.

----
review/critique topic

I think this is part of the reason I don't posting reviews. A review is subjective, it's just IMHO. A critique on the other hand, should NOT be opinion oriented. I don't think I am qualified to be a critiquer, so I don't want to put anything out there other than my opinion. Now, I do PM or e-mail indie authors when I find a typo or other little oopsie in their text, but I don't see that as a critique of their writing.


----------



## traceya (Apr 26, 2010)

I totally agree with Michelle on this - if you're a writer and you want to write a review, take your writer's hat off.  Think and review like a reader because reviews are for readers.  That's not saying you should pull any punches, if as a reader you found the book unpalatable for any number of reasons, list them but don't fall into the trap of thinking 'well I would've done it this way'.  Just read it and either enjoy it or not and then write what you felt AS a reader.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> -License plate topic- when we lived in Okinawa from '96-'99 they put stickers on the cars instead of changing license plates. Kinda an upside down teardrop shape iirc, that was split in 2 lengthwise and the 2 sides were like blue & yellow, or red & white, or something... but anyway, the point is, they weren't for drunks, but one color set was for drivers who had possessed their licenses for under a year, so you knew they were new drivers, and the other color set was for the very old drivers (like 85+). There has been more than one time since coming back to the States that I have wished we had something similar.


+1 for this. I'm surprised I didn't make this connection as well, but I too thought it sounded like a sex offender registration list.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I know it will be gone with your very next reply ForeverJuly/Jason, but ATM.. you have 1981 posts, you George Orwell you.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

BTackitt said:


> I know it will be gone with your very next reply ForeverJuly/Jason, but ATM.. you have 1981 posts, you George Orwell you.


Ack, I didn't notice. It's ok. I actually really like Scheherazade. She's one of my favorite characters. I love the story about the mis-print of the first edition of Arabian Nights, in which the very moment she opens her mouth to tell the story that must save her life there was an error, causing the entire book to start over again from the very first word in an infinite loop. Thus, she was saved forever!


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I guess I look at it from the point same point of view as Flannery. There's a big difference between solicited and unsolicited.
> 
> Question - would you walk up to a stranger on the street and tell them an outfit accentuates their hips, and not in a good way? Oh, and if they wear vertical pinstripes, it'll make their legs look longer? No? Then what makes it okay online?


If they were selling their services as a fashion designer, I would.
Keep context in mind. Would I post a review online of someone's private poetry journal? Of course not. But we're talking about books being sold to the public for money, not a total stranger on the street.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> Yeasterday, I baked bread at the break of day.
> Those stupid chickens wouldn't lay.
> Now it looks as though my nerves might fray.
> Oh, yeasterday, was eggy free.
> ...


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> If they were selling their services as a fashion designer, I would.
> Keep context in mind. Would I post a review online of someone's private poetry journal? Of course not. But we're talking about books being sold to the public for money, not a total stranger on the street.


Go back to my posts on reviews vs. critiques, Julie, please. I freely admit that I went 'round the block a few times, but I really do think there's a difference between a review and a critique. You'll notice that I said that review should absolutely be given, whether requested or not.

Edit: This topic has also morphed into the Writers Reviewing Writers topic somehow  For the record, regardless of whether a critique OR a review was solicited or not the only polite response is a "Thank you", in my opinion.


----------



## Carolyn J. Rose Mystery Writer (Aug 10, 2010)

Once writers offer a book for review, they relinquish all control. If they don't realize that, then they shouldn't ask for reviews.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Go back to my posts on reviews vs. critiques, *****, please. I freely admit that I went 'round the block a few times, but I really do think there's a difference between a review and a critique. You'll notice that I said that review should absolutely be given, whether requested or not.


I'm not sure where this reviews vs critiques came up. Honestly, I don't do critiques for free. I get paid to do those because those are much more technical oriented and time consuming. I was talking about reviews and pointing out good and bad. I confess, I zoned out when people started differentiating because that was never the point of any of my posts.  

When I review, I point out things that I like and the things that I feel don't work. But I don't spend time telling the writer how to fix the things that don't work, because that really is the job of an editor and I don't edit for free. Even when I send out an email declining to review, I'm giving the author the reasons why I declined, not revising their document for them in the process. I do try to give concrete examples (I may mention a specific scene as an example of something not working), but I'm not making suggestions or corrections. I may note that a book is filled with grammar errors, but I'm not going to go through the book and highlight every one.


Spoiler



As an aside, no I don't try to "upsell" people I decline to review (I've been accused of that in the past). In fact, I generally turn down requests for critiques in regards to books that have already been published and released for sale. I prefer to work with unpublished material, when the author is more likely to listen to suggestions and not have a financial investment in the book already locked it. (Though this is more an issue with print, where there are costs associated with revisions, than digital).


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm not sure where this reviews vs critiques came up. Honestly, I don't do critiques for free. I get paid to do those because those are much more technical oriented and time consuming. I was talking about reviews and pointing out good and bad. I confess, I zoned out when people started differentiating because that was never the point of any of my posts.


  I'm not sure where we took the wrong fork in the road, either, but somewhere... about mid-thread, I think, I got derailed into the review vs. critique discussion. 



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> When I review, I point out things that I like and the things that I feel don't work. But I don't spend time telling the writer how to fix the things that don't work, because that really is the job of an editor and I don't edit for free. Even when I send out an email declining to review, I'm giving the author the reasons why I declined, not revising their document for them in the process. I do try to give concrete examples (I may mention a specific scene as an example of something not working), but I'm not making suggestions or corrections. I may note that a book is filled with grammar errors, but I'm not going to go through the book and highlight every one.


This was pretty much my point. Again, made much more eloquently than my late-night attempts 



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> As an aside, no I don't try to "upsell" people I decline to review (I've been accused of that in the past). In fact, I generally turn down requests for critiques in regards to books that have already been published and released for sale. I prefer to work with unpublished material, when the author is more likely to listen to suggestions and not have a financial investment in the book already locked it. (Though this is more an issue with print, where there are costs associated with revisions, than digital).


Can't say that I blame you on that. I'm kind of surprised someone would think that you do, honestly. Ah, well, go figure. People surprise me every day


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

For more amusing stories from my e-mails you can go read my latest blog post  regarding an e-mail I got from a writer's BOYFRIEND. No a self-publishing author, but still funny...and sad. Not directly related to my original point here, so just offering it for your amusement.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> For more amusing stories from my e-mails you can go read my latest blog post  regarding an e-mail I got from a writer's BOYFRIEND. No a self-publishing author, but still funny...and sad. Not directly related to my original point here, so just offering it for your amusement.


Omigod - crazy. In fairness, she may have had nothing to do with it. Well, aside from crying. But, boyfriend may have seen / heard her tears and took it upon himself to stand up for her. You may get an email from her in a couple of days after she's drowned her sorrows in chocolate and ice cream (or chocolate ice cream) thanking you for your critique (I can hope, right?)

I just want to tell the boyfriend - "Dude, while it's cool you want to stick up for your girlfriend... you aren't helping by doing this." Just like you wouldn't cuss her boss for giving her a poor evaluation, telling off a potential publisher is counter-productive and professionally damaging.

In fact, I think I'll post the above on your blog. Maybe he'll see it and feel crunchy.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

Arkali said:


> Omigod - crazy. In fairness, she may have had nothing to do with it. Well, aside from crying. But, boyfriend may have seen / heard her tears and took it upon himself to stand up for her. You may get an email from her in a couple of days after she's drowned her sorrows in chocolate and ice cream (or chocolate ice cream) thanking you for your critique (I can hope, right?)


I posted a version of this over there. That's exactly what I think happened! He hasn't done her any favors and I doubt he'd like her telling his boss or someone in his professional life what he feels about them or that one time he was stressed from work and cried or that he doesn't get paid enough... Home and work are two different things and what is said at home is private.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I really hope so.  I hope Julie gets a thank-you email from girlfriend, completely oblivious that her "helpful" boyfriend acted an ass.

Oh - I just read the freedom of speech blog, too.  Jeez.  I think you said it best, Julie, when you said "GROW UP!"  How do these people even hold a job in the real world?  I'm boggled.


----------



## Guest (Oct 25, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Oh - I just read the freedom of speech blog, too. Jeez. I think you said it best, *****, when you said "GROW UP!" How do these people even hold a job in the real world? I'm boggled.


I really wish more editors and publishers would share the contents of their inbox. I think it is a rather eye-opening experience for writers. I have conversations with other small press publishers, and I swear my stories pale in comparison to some of the things I've heard. 

I use to think it was just a problem with the genre I write in, because we all know that us horror and fantasy writers aren't rooted in reality  But I remember talking to an editor who worked for a small press that published romances who told me about the woman who sent her book submission to him with a pair of lacy panties, and a note saying that if he accepted the book for publication, she would send him the photos of her wearing the panties.   

At least I've never gotten...eh hem...previously owned underwear in the mail!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I use to think it was just a problem with the genre I write in, because we all know that us horror and fantasy writers aren't rooted in reality  But I remember talking to an editor who worked for a small press that published romances who told me about the woman who sent her book submission to him with a pair of lacy panties, and a note saying that if he accepted the book for publication, she would send him the photos of her wearing the panties.


No way! No WAY! Omigod, omigod, omigod.

:gags:

Hopefully they were at least clean. But.... AAAAGGGHHHH! Squicked out, over here.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> At least I've never gotten...eh hem...previously owned underwear in the mail!


Hahahaha, well I guess that's a plus, at least. Horrifying!


----------



## David.Niall.Wilson (Feb 28, 2010)

I'm way-late in finding this topic, and I'm still shaking my head and laughing at the very first post.  I mean...if you are going to try and berate a potential reviewer (not a good idea), and one of the complaints is that your grammar / copy-editing is bad...why would you send either an all-caps e-mail or one that looks like it was composed by a "c" student in fifth grade?  

I applaud you for both honest reviewing and sticking to your guns.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

David.Niall.Wilson said:


> I'm way-late in finding this topic, and I'm still shaking my head and laughing at the very first post. I mean...if you are going to try and berate a potential reviewer (not a good idea), and one of the complaints is that your grammar / copy-editing is bad...why would you send either an all-caps e-mail or one that looks like it was composed by a "c" student in fifth grade?
> 
> I applaud you for both honest reviewing and sticking to your guns.


The all caps and non-punctuated thing is a must for the true rant on how the reviewer is a repressed hag who has nothing better than to care about silly stuff like being able to easily understand the text. It means the ranter gets laid a lot and has a wonderful life.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> The all caps and non-punctuated thing is a must for the true rant on how the reviewer is a repressed hag who has nothing better than to care about silly stuff like being able to easily understand the text. It means the ranter gets laid a lot and has a wonderful life.


ORLY?!?!? I NEVER WOULD HAVE GUESSED!


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

I think thin skin and overreaction is just part of the learning curve. We all go through it. We're all dewy-eyed in the beginning, and toughen up gradually, one reaction at a time. I don't see it as emotional immaturity as much as career immaturity. When you write you expose yourself, probably more than you could in any other creative endeavor, and probably more than you ever have before. It doesn't matter how old you are, and how level-headed you are in your normal life. When you bare your soul and someone criticizes that soul, you aren't entirely prepared for it because you've written your work with this image of yourself that you're talented and are going to be successful. You are looking for validation.

I have seen authors who solicit tough reviewers because they think they'll be the exception - they'll be the one that reviewer loves. These are the baby writers. Some, though - the ones with more career maturity - really want to hear it. But even they want to hear it in a balanced manner.

Have you ever read the advice column by Carolyn Hax? If not, Google her. She's brilliant. But when you write to her for advice, she rips you a new one and gives you a blow by blow account of why your problem is your own flipping fault. And then some. She sometimes begins her responses with: "Excuse me? Please wait while I bang my head on the keyboard." 

When I first read her column I wondered who would be idiotic enough to write to this woman. I cringed for them, and for how embarrassed they must be; I was just being exposed to her and didn't "get" it because I was new to her style after the more delicate and respectful Dear Abby who always presumes the writer is in the right. That was where I was when I first published in 2001, and where these new authors are today. Then, the more I read her column, the more I realized she was spot on, doesn't coddle you, and always sees the situation in a manner that is crystal clear. She is not an enabler. She is EXACTLY the person I would go to with a problem because she would tell me exactly what is within my power to change, and how to go about it. I would go there begging for her to rip me a new one, if that would bring me clarity. 

I would now go begging for a reviewer or a proofreader to bring me clarity, but would also have to ask that it be done in a respectful manner. Our books are not life mistakes. We need clarity but not raggedly ripped "new ones". Find something nice to say, then list the criticisms. Then sandwich those criticisms by closing with something else you liked. Be constructive. Don't unload your negative observations on the writer without pointing out the positive. 

If you're asked to critique and do it skillfully, the writer will not be resentful, and will not be angry. "I loved the way you described the scene, but I didn't understand the motivation. Can you draw out the characters? I really wanted more from Joe and Bob, and less from Randy - if you don't want to develop them, can you remove them altogether? I don't see that they're critical to the story. The dialog seemed wooden to me. Have you tried saying the words aloud? Would someone really say that?" Pointed and probing questions are more helpful than a heaping pile of declarative sentences. It may not be your style, to do it gently. It may let you off the hook to warn writers in advance. But critiques can ultimately be more helpful if you approach them as a sandwich with the bad part in the middle, and a hefty side of gently probing - and with luck and skill - enlightening questions.

Just my two cents.


----------



## ReeseReed (Dec 5, 2009)

One of the first things I learned as a teacher is how to talk to parents about those, well, um...problem children.  You always begin with something positive, even if you have to dig really deep down to find it.  Then you outline the problems and what needs to be done to correct them.  Just before the parent leaves, you give another compliment...exactly the "sandwich" the pp mentioned.  I post this only because so many authors, especially early in their writing careers, see their books as their "baby".  Alas, as is the case with some writers, some parents don't want to hear anything constructive about helping their children succeed in school, and huff away.  But there are those who DO, and they truly appreciate the both the help you suggest and the kind words.


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Reviewing and critique is a skill. We're all self-proclaimed experts in judging - we all have an opinion and know ours is best. I rate reviewers with one-to-five stars based on the same criteria I would use to grade a book report. Does the reviewer "get" it? Are the criticisms valid? Are the praises valid? Do I now see something in the work that I may otherwise have missed because of this reviewer's insight?

If I were giving a blind rating to a someone who performs critiques, I would deduct two stars immediately if that person was repeatedly angering the writers who asked for critiques. Anger is not helpful. Making people angry does not help them. The remaining three stars would stay or go, depending on how successfully that reviewer delivered the book report. As a reader, I'm looking at the credibility of the reviewer as much as the writer, and a hacksaw is not the best tool for this. If you're using a hacksaw, you raise questions in my mind about you. 

I look for critiques that inspire and excite the writers and bring out the best in them and their works, and would seek out that kind of reviewer. 

That's something new writers learn along the way: which reviewers to solicit, and which to avoid. You can obtain clarity without being decapitated. There are reviewers and editors and proofreaders who do this. Go after them. 

And if you are a decapitating reviewer or editor or proofreader, you may want to focus on something that better matches your skill set, and which actually helps. It isn't the writer's fault if you make her cry. Claiming it is would make Carolyn Hax hit her head on her keyboard.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Arkali said:


> No way! No WAY! Omigod, omigod, omigod.
> 
> :gags:
> 
> Hopefully they were at least clean. But.... AAAAGGGHHHH! Squicked out, over here.





Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But I remember talking to an editor who worked for a small press that published romances who told me about the woman who sent her book submission to him with a pair of lacy panties, and a note saying that if he accepted the book for publication, she would send him the photos of her wearing the panties.
> 
> At least I've never gotten...eh hem...previously owned underwear in the mail!


LOL, Arkali's reaction gave me this image of size 18 granny panties with a note "if you don't publish my book I'll send pictures of me wearing these panties.".


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Chad Winters (#102) said:


> LOL, Arkali's reaction gave me this image of size 18 granny panties with a note "if you don't publish my book I'll send pictures of me wearing these panties.".


LOL I don't wear granny panties - what are you insinuating?!?!

Back on topic:


Nell Gavin said:


> If I were giving a blind rating to a someone who performs critiques, I would deduct two stars immediately if that person was repeatedly angering the writers who asked for critiques. Anger is not helpful. Making people angry does not help them. The remaining three stars would stay or go, depending on how successfully that reviewer delivered the book report. As a reader, I'm looking at the credibility of the reviewer as much as the writer, and a hacksaw is not the best tool for this. If you're using a hacksaw, you raise questions in my mind about you.
> 
> I look for critiques that inspire and excite the writers and bring out the best in them and their works, and would seek out that kind of reviewer.
> 
> And if you are a decapitating reviewer or editor or proofreader, you may want to focus on something that better matches your skill set, and which actually helps. It isn't the writer's fault if you make her cry. Claiming it is would make Carolyn Hax hit her head on her keyboard.


Some people get upset if you gently point out the difference between lose and loose, or tell them why "curving my sweat tooth" is not correct (yes - I've seen "curving my sweat tooth" - I nearly died). They will say you're stuck up, enjoy putting others down, or claim it makes no difference as long as people can puzzle out their meaning. It doesn't matter if you point it gently, tactfully, or what - you CORRECTED them. How dare you?!?!? Sorry - I can't agree with all of your points.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

I'm will Nell on that one. _Repeatedly_ angering the people you critique for means you need to look in the mirror, too.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I really wish more editors and publishers would share the contents of their inbox. I think it is a rather eye-opening experience for writers. I have conversations with other small press publishers, and I swear my stories pale in comparison to some of the things I've heard.
> 
> I use to think it was just a problem with the genre I write in, because we all know that us horror and fantasy writers aren't rooted in reality  But I remember talking to an editor who worked for a small press that published romances who told me about the woman who sent her book submission to him with a pair of lacy panties, and a note saying that if he accepted the book for publication, she would send him the photos of her wearing the panties.
> 
> At least I've never gotten...eh hem...previously owned underwear in the mail!


OMG! GROSS!

People are shameless!!

I was told that I wasn't a "real Christian" and only was "pretending" to be one, because I didn't respond quickly enough to someone's poetry submission, and when I did it was only to reject it. 
Mind you this came AFTER I posted "not accepting any new poetry until after 1-2011 on my submissions page.

I think it was pretty laughable actually.

I hope and pray nobody EVER sends me used underwear. * barf! *


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> LOL I don't wear granny panties - what are you insinuating?!?!
> 
> Back on topic:
> Some people get upset if you gently point out the difference between lose and loose, or tell them why "curving my sweat tooth" is not correct (yes - I've seen "curving my sweat tooth" - I nearly died). They will say you're stuck up, enjoy putting others down, or claim it makes no difference as long as people can puzzle out their meaning. It doesn't matter if you point it gently, tactfully, or what - you CORRECTED them. How dare you?!?!? Sorry - I can't agree with all of your points.


I once had an author get angry with me and defensive for suggesting commas in lengthy sentences, so I know what you mean. I spent years tussling with VPs over their use of passive voice and muddled descriptions in professional documents, and their insistence that I publish those documents the way they told me to.

When I politely showed them the rules, they had to back down. Their choice.

You simply point out that you answer to a higher power: the rules of grammar. Suggest that they look it up if they disagree. Keep a supply of links to grammar rules handy, and send them along with the comments, if you are really trying to be helpful. Then suggest that they concentrate on the basics of writing so that the wonderful (story, dialog, message) resonates with the reader before they publish or rewrite. Make sure you point out a wonderful "something" when you begin and before you sign off.

Beyond grammar everything else is subjective. You can suggest but not condemn. Ask questions so they can figure out what's wrong and feel as if they discovered it themselves. If it's so awful you can't continue reading, fall back on the rules of grammar, and tell them how fine it will be when they have it down.

But don't get indignant or condescending toward them - you're just as guilty as the defensive writer if you huff and puff because the writer dismisses your wisdom and greater knowledge, and doesn't appreciate you. It may be that you don't back up your statements with the rules. Or you don't "get" it and therefore presume there's nothing about the book to "get" - for anyone. Or you're having a bad day. Or it isn't your preferred genre. Or you have a hacksaw that you earnestly think is The Tactful Truth.

Examine your approach as well as their reaction. In fact, their reaction is feedback on your skill and value as a reviewer. If they get angry, rethink your approach. Fine tune it. That's all. Or stop reviewing.

Then give them time to mature professionally and find the value in honest critiques. There will always be new authors. Always. These new authors will always have thin skins. Always. You can't make it your personal crusade to rid the world of them.


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> When I politely showed them the rules, they had to back down. Their choice.


To clarify: while I am blunt, I'm not deliberately going out to "decapitate" people (OK, maybe a few times in forum posts....but those people really deserved it  ). I generally use the most _nuetral_ language possible. But people read what they want to read, not neccessarily what you wrote. For example, in other threads I tend to use the impersonal you when speaking in general terms. Well, on more than one occassion someone several pages back in a thread will think I was talking to them directly (even if I didn't quote them or reference their arguments).

It would be one thing if people came to me blind. But assuming someone has read my submission guidelines or even bothered to read some of my reviews before requesting a review, they should know my style and what to expect. It's not like I am some hidden, anonymous entity lurking in the shadows to jump out at hapless writers . We're not talking about unsolicited comments in a forum out of the blue, but someone making a conscious decision to send me something and asking for the review.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Julie,

I would be very honored if you would do a review of _Falling Star_. I have been busy for the last two weeks trying to get an updated and uniform version on Smashwords, Amazon, and Create Space.

As you may have seen, I just received my first one-star review. I've has a bit of fun with that review, perhaps because of the intensity with which the reviewer's disliked my story and writing ability. I'd be interested in a candid appraisal.

I will send you an email shortly.

Thanks and keep up the good work.

Phil


----------



## NickSpalding (Apr 21, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> You simply point out that you answer to a higher power: the rules of grammar. Suggest that they look it up if they disagree. Keep a supply of links to grammar rules handy, and send them along with the comments, if you are really trying to be helpful. Then suggest that they concentrate on the basics of writing so that the wonderful (story, dialog, message) resonates with the reader before they publish or rewrite. Make sure you point out a wonderful "something" when you begin and before you sign off.
> 
> Beyond grammar everything else is subjective. You can suggest but not condemn. Ask questions so they can figure out what's wrong and feel as if they discovered it themselves. If it's so awful you can't continue reading, fall back on the rules of grammar, and tell them how fine it will be when they have it down.


There's a very special level of Hell reserved for writers who think they are somehow _above _ the rules of grammar. I've known a few actively argue against a change to correct grammar because they feel it 'detracts from their art'.

Let me be entirely clear on this: People of this type are cretinous, malodorous, dung-brained oxygen thieves who should have been strangled at birth.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

NickSpalding said:


> There's a very special level of Hell reserved for writers who think they are somehow _above _ the rules of grammar. *I've known a few actively argue against a change to correct grammar because they feel it 'detracts from their art'.*
> 
> Let me be entirely clear on this: People of this type are cretinous, malodorous, dung-brained oxygen thieves who should have been strangled at birth.


LOL As to the bolded part, I always figured that was their excuse, kind of like the guy who hits on the girl, then turns belligerent when she turns him down. And it's okay, anyway, because obviously she's a lesbian, and he wasn't interested anyway


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> To clarify: while I am blunt, I'm not deliberately going out to "decapitate" people (OK, maybe a few times in forum posts....but those people really deserved it  ). I generally use the most _nuetral_ language possible. But people read what they want to read, not neccessarily what you wrote. For example, in other threads I tend to use the impersonal you when speaking in general terms. Well, on more than one occassion someone several pages back in a thread will think I was talking to them directly (even if I didn't quote them or reference their arguments).
> 
> It would be one thing if people came to me blind. But assuming someone has read my submission guidelines or even bothered to read some of my reviews before requesting a review, they should know my style and what to expect. It's not like I am some hidden, anonymous entity lurking in the shadows to jump out at hapless writers . We're not talking about unsolicited comments in a forum out of the blue, but someone making a conscious decision to send me something and asking for the review.


Julie,

I've never read your reviews, but I've read your ongoing posts for months. You have a "tone" that suggests you may be burning out. What you call "blunt" may not be appropriate for new authors, who always overestimate their stamina when it comes to taking criticism. You get yourself off the hook by saying they should know better, but it takes time to know yourself as an author, and to find your worth. They don't know better. They just don't.

You have an opportunity to nurture and teach. That's all I'm saying. You can squander it with blunt declarative sentences (if that's what you use - I see them in your posts), or you can help them. That's all they're asking you for.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Nell Gavin said:


> Julie,
> 
> I've never read your reviews, but I've read your ongoing posts for months. You have a "tone" that suggests you may be burning out. What you call "blunt" may not be appropriate for new authors, who always overestimate their stamina when it comes to taking criticism. You get yourself off the hook by saying they should know better, but it takes time to know yourself as an author, and to find your worth. They don't know better. They just don't.
> 
> You have an opportunity to nurture and teach. That's all I'm saying. You can squander it with blunt declarative sentences (if that's what you use - I see them in your posts), or you can help them. That's all they're asking you for.


I have to respond to this as I tend to be "blunt," also.

First of all, understand that Julie and I are both Professional Reviewers. I do not use the term "Professional" lightly. We are being paid, somehow by somebody, for giving our opinions of published works. The operative words here are "paid" and "published."

We are not teachers. We are not family and friends. We are not beta readers.

Just by offering any opinion at all privately to an author, we go above and beyond the call of duty. Send your book to a NYT reviewer. Do you think that reviewer would take the time to tell you why they decided NOT to read your book?? Heck, no! I bet you would never even hear from them again.

Like Julie, I ask authors if they want to know why I chose not to read their work. If they choose to know my reason, then they need to take the response while wearing their big girl panties. Period.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> Julie,
> 
> I've never read your reviews, but I've read your ongoing posts for months. You have a "tone" that suggests you may be burning out. What you call "blunt" may not be appropriate for new authors, who always overestimate their stamina when it comes to taking criticism. You get yourself off the hook by saying they should know better, but it takes time to know yourself as an author, and to find your worth. They don't know better. They just don't.
> 
> You have an opportunity to nurture and teach. That's all I'm saying. You can squander it with blunt declarative sentences (if that's what you use - I see them in your posts), or you can help them. That's all they're asking you for.


Honestly, I think Julie's posts are incredibly helpful. She knows what she's talking about and while she is extremely blunt (and her posts do sometimes invoke that immediate feel of defensiveness), she doesn't coddle authors and give them useless information. Her reviews are to-the-point and even if an author can't immediately take criticism (and really, if they're publishing, they should be able to take fair criticism), hopefully they will keep it in the back of their head until they can handle it. I don't think anyone should be less honest or blunt with someone, just because they're a new author.


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I have to respond to this as I tend to be "blunt," also.
> 
> First of all, understand that Julie and I are both Professional Reviewers. I do not use the term "Professional" lightly. We are being paid, somehow by somebody, for giving our opinions of published works. The operative words here are "paid" and "published."
> 
> ...


Let me clarify that "review" and "critique" are two different things, and I was referring to "solicited critiques". I think I wasn't quite clear on that point. If you want to be a reviewer, review. If you agree to give a critique it's a different animal, and the author is your student. You take on the role of teacher. If you reject that role, reject requests for critiques.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I think it's time to reiterate: a review is NOT about the writer.  Frankly, the writer's feelings are irrelevant to the process.  A review is between the reviewer and her readers.  To modify the review to please the writer in any way is to betray the readers.

I agree with whoever said it was a maturing process, but come on. Unprofessional behavior shows more than sensitivity - it displays a certain amount of selfishness.  You can feel very hurt and go cry to your friends, and swear never to submit another book anywhere - that's normal for some who was unprepared for the hurt. But this lashing out behavior is actual real immaturity, not just career immaturity.

Camille


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> Let me clarify that "review" and "critique" are two different things, and I was referring to "solicited critiques". I think I wasn't quite clear on that point. If you want to be a reviewer, review. If you agree to give a critique it's a different animal, and the author is your student. You take on the role of teacher. If you reject that role, reject requests for critiques.


I think Julie mentioned (and I'm never going to find it again in this huge thread) that authors have to pay for critiques. If I'm paying someone to critique my book, I want as much information as possible - which in my mind means the most problems that I should work on fixing. Yes, it would be painful and hurt to hear, but I wouldn't want to pay to hear someone go gentle on me. I want to hear everything that doesn't work, because those are the parts I would need to work on.


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> I think it's time to reiterate: a review is NOT about the writer. Frankly, the writer's feelings are irrelevant to the process. A review is between the reviewer and her readers. To modify the review to please the writer in any way is to betray the readers.
> 
> I agree with whoever said it was a maturing process, but come on. Unprofessional behavior shows more than sensitivity - it displays a certain amount of selfishness. You can feel very hurt and go cry to your friends, and swear never to submit another book anywhere - that's normal for some who was unprepared for the hurt. But this lashing out behavior is actual real immaturity, not just career immaturity.
> 
> Camille


I work in the e-mail department of a huge organization. People who are lifelong professionals put up their best front in person. They get a lot testier over the phone. But when they send you e-mails, you're dealing with people in diapers. They fling f-bombs and make accusations, and ridicule you and threaten. You would think they were "mature" if you met them. They run companies and lead people, and do great things. But humanity has a way of turning infantile at the drop of a hat - present company excluded, of course. But they do, and over really stupid things. They whine and suck their thumbs.

You take a mature person who spent years putting his or her soul into a story, and suddenly the baby emerges. That doesn't always mean they're immature. Sometimes it does, but people all have their moments. It means you struck the Achilles heel and they reacted.

There's a little baby in everyone. Career maturity enables you to find perspective and put it under wraps. (Unless you're president of a company and e-mailing me.)


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> I think Julie mentioned (and I'm never going to find it again in this huge thread) that authors have to pay for critiques. If I'm paying someone to critique my book, I want as much information as possible - which in my mind means the most problems that I should work on fixing. Yes, it would be painful and hurt to hear, but I wouldn't want to pay to hear someone go gentle on me. I want to hear everything that doesn't work, because those are the parts I would need to work on.


Would you not work on those things if the critique was kind and thoughtful?


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

In my critique group, we have a rule that we always start with something positive. After that, though, we are all trying to become more professional and sell our work so we need to know if there are any problems.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

NickSpalding said:


> There's a very special level of Hell reserved for writers who think they are somehow _above _ the rules of grammar. I've known a few actively argue against a change to correct grammar because they feel it 'detracts from their art'.
> 
> Let me be entirely clear on this: People of this type are cretinous, malodorous, dung-brained oxygen thieves who should have been strangled at birth.


Except in the case where you have a character who doesn't speak proper grammar, and every time that character speaks their portion of dialogue (in quotation marks of course) reveals that character's dialect, or lack of education...or poor speech.

Then again, those types of things are obvious


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> I work in the e-mail department of a huge organization. People who are lifelong professionals put up their best front in person. They get a lot testier over the phone. But when they send you e-mails, you're dealing with people in diapers. They fling f-bombs and make accusations, and ridicule you and threaten. You would think they were "mature" if you met them. They run companies and lead people, and do great things. But humanity has a way of turning infantile at the drop of a hat - present company excluded, of course. But they do, and over really stupid things. They whine and suck their thumbs.
> 
> You take a mature person who spent years putting his or her soul into a story, and suddenly the baby emerges. That doesn't always mean they're immature. Sometimes it does, but people all have their moments. It means you struck the Achilles heel and they reacted.
> 
> There's a little baby in everyone. Career maturity enables you to find perspective and put it under wraps. (Unless you're president of a company and e-mailing me.)


Yeah, I work with those people, and they're not mature in real life either.

Again - it's not that they're hurt or weak or shocked. It's not that they cry or get angry or overreact. Those are normal. Lashing out, on the other hand, is like road rage. There is ZERO excuse for it. No one should ever tolerate that sort of reaction to anything.

Haven't you ever noticed that these people who are so immature in email only do it to people with whom they believe they can get away with it? Usually their non-unionized underlings or strangers.

Camille


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

Just to tie everything up a bit because after 17 pages we've wandered a wee bit (OK, we drove off the bridge into a ditch, but it's all been in good fun )

None of this was about critiques, but reviews. Reviews that were specifically requested, and reviews for which I clarified how I do things before I agreed to review the book. One instance involved a free marketing opportunity that I offer (the book excerpt) in my newsletter. Again, the author contacted me, and I explained the rules of the program before they submitted anything. I don't do free critiques because they do involve detailed explanations of not only what is wrong, but how to fix it. These were just book reviews.

Burnt out? No. Frustrated? Yes. Frustrated because of something nobody wants to admit or acknowledge. _I don't see this behavior out of traditionally published writers._ I review indies, small press, and large publisher titles. I've never been attacked by a traditionally published author. Not in all the years I've been doing this. And I treat them the same way as I do indies. I reject their books too. I agree to review but then have to inform them I can't complete the review for some reason (number one reason for those that care: a horror novel that turns out to be a paranormal romance disguised as a horror novel.) The most I ever get back is, "Sorry you feel you can't review the book. Thank you for letting us know so that we can update our records." or something to that effect. Never once have I been attacked like I am when I deal with self-publishers.

Further, I talk to other publishers and reviewers. THEY ALL SAY THE SAME THING. You want to support the indies, because you know there is talent there, but you start to get to a point when you wonder if it is worth it. The beauty of digital and POD technology is that anyone can publish. The downfall of digital and POD technology is anyone can publish. We try to tell ourselves that the cream rises to the top, but it is hard for the cream to rise to the top when it is covered with crap. It becomes frustrating when you see this behavior, because it is not isolated nor is it easily explained away with people having a bad day or saying that they need to be handled with kid gloves. I've mentioned this previously, I know a reviewer who will never review a self-pub book again after a man threatened to RAPE her daughter over a bad review. That is not career immaturity. That was the final straw for a reviewer after a long line of abuse from self-pub authors.

The point of this thread was not a feel sorry for ***** thing. It was a "we need to police our own and hold each other accountable" thread. Because we can say they don't know any better, but damnit they SHOULD. And we shouldn't make excuses for the bad behavior and try to justify it because it only reinforces it.

My ex's niece was on Ridalin from the age of 3. Sometimes she would come over and spend the day with us. With everyone else in the family, she was a holy terror if she didn't have her pill. We took her to the mall one day, and she kept running off. Apparently her mom forgot to give her her pill that morning, and my ex just shrugged because "she didn't have her pill." I got tired of it and told her the next time she ran off I was gonna snatch her up and spank her in from of everyone. She said to me "You can't yell at me. I haven't had my pill." She then proceeding to run off again. I snatched her up, gave her a light (but embarassing) smack on the backside in front of everyone in the mall. She was fine the rest of the day. The moral of the story is, the child DID know better, but because everyone around her reinforced the notion that she didn't she continued in the bad behavior.

We can't make excuses for the bad behavior. We can't justify it with saying they don't know better. They do. And if they don't, they have no business publishing.

Again, none of this is about casual discussions in a forum or unsolicited critiques or anything like that. It is about someone who claims to be a professional communicating with another professional in a business environment. Because Bards and Sages IS a business, and my reviews are part of my business, and when someone sends me a business e-mail regarding my business I expect it to be business-like. Particularly if I show you the professional courtesy of communicating with you privately instead of posting a two-star review on Amazon.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> We can't make excuses for the bad behavior. We can't justify it with saying they don't know better. They do. And if they don't, they have no business publishing.
> 
> Again, none of this is about casual discussions in a forum or unsolicited critiques or anything like that. It is about someone who claims to be a professional communicating with another professional in a business environment. Because Bards and Sages IS a business, and my reviews are part of my business, and when someone sends me a business e-mail regarding my business I expect it to be business-like. Particularly if I show you the professional courtesy of communicating with you privately instead of posting a two-star review on Amazon.


Amen.

And omigod, the story of your friend - horrifying. I don't blame him for refusing to accept indies after that. That sort of thing is just WRONG and nobody should have to put up with it. Undoubtedly, that was his thought, too, and he probably immediately said "And I'm not GOING to put up with it any more!" and then - :snaps fingers: no more indie reviews from him. :shakes head:


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> And omigod, the story of your friend - horrifying. I don't blame him for refusing to accept indies after that. That sort of thing is just WRONG and nobody should have to put up with it. Undoubtedly, that was his thought, too, and he probably immediately said "And I'm not GOING to put up with it any more!" and then - :snaps fingers: no more indie reviews from him. :shakes head:


There is actually a whole story behind it. It wasn't a friend, but a reviewer that I sent a query to for my book _Dead Men (and Women) Walking_. She saw that the publisher said lulu.com on Amazon.com and shot off an e-mail to me that only said "I am no longer reviewing self-published books" and that was it. I sent her a reply thanking her for the reply, and explained to her that while I was using Lulu, this wasn't a self-published book, but an anthology (and I had paid each author to use the stories, not one of those "OK guys, if we sell anything we'll split the profits" things). Then she realized I was a member of the International Women's Writing Guild, and so was she, so she opened up to me and told me what happened.

Here is the thing: if I hadn't bothered to befriend her and ask why, I probably would have become one of those people who bitches and whines about reviewers not giving indies a chance and being elitists and all the stuff you see people complain about. But it opened my eyes, and similar conversations with other reviewers and publishers over the years opened my eyes. And that really is why I have a zro tolerance policy for this sort of stuff. Because it does hurt us all. The internet is a surprisingly small place, and tolerating bad behavior or makign excuses for it only makes it harder to root out before it gets to the point of no return.


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Burnt out? No. Frustrated? Yes. Frustrated because of something nobody wants to admit or acknowledge. _I don't see this behavior out of traditionally published writers._ I review indies, small press, and large publisher titles. I've never been attacked by a traditionally published author. Not in all the years I've been doing this. And I treat them the same way as I do indies. I reject their books too. I agree to review but then have to inform them I can't complete the review for some reason (number one reason for those that care: a horror novel that turns out to be a paranormal romance disguised as a horror novel.) The most I ever get back is, "Sorry you feel you can't review the book. Thank you for letting us know so that we can update our records." or something to that effect. Never once have I been attacked like I am when I deal with self-publishers.
> 
> Further, I talk to other publishers and reviewers. THEY ALL SAY THE SAME THING. You want to support the indies, because you know there is talent there, but you start to get to a point when you wonder if it is worth it. The beauty of digital and POD technology is that anyone can publish. The downfall of digital and POD technology is anyone can publish. We try to tell ourselves that the cream rises to the top, but it is hard for the cream to rise to the top when it is covered with crap. It becomes frustrating when you see this behavior, because it is not isolated nor is it easily explained away with people having a bad day or saying that they need to be handled with kid gloves. I've mentioned this previously, I know a reviewer who will never review a self-pub book again after a man threatened to RAPE her daughter over a bad review. That is not career immaturity. That was the final straw for a reviewer after a long line of abuse from self-pub authors.
> 
> ...


I completely understand and appreciate what you're saying--anyone submitting their book for a review needs to understand that there's no guarantee the reviewer will like it. Lashing out or threatening a reviewer for either declining to review your book or giving it a critical review is never acceptable. I think most everyone here agrees with that.

I don't actually think that this is a problem with a solution, though. I doubt highly that the indie publishing community at large approves of or makes excuses for authors who resort to threats and intimidation when their books aren't well-received. I also doubt that authors who behave in that way think it's appropriate or socially acceptable--if they did, the two KBers in question probably would have poked their heads into this thread to try and justify their actions. We can talk about unnamed authors behaving badly all we want, but what can _we_ (indie authors, readers, reviewers, etc.) really do to prevent it from happening?

Declare that threatening to rape someone's daughter over a negative review is unnacceptable? Well, of course it is. Most people understand that without being told. And yet an author chose to do it anyway. Of course he knew that wasn't right (or else he has serious mental problems). Either way, being told it's wrong probably wouldn't have stopped him.

Really the only way to "punish" an author for bad behavior is to expose that behavior and let them face the consequences (both to their reputation and their sales). Allowing them to remain anonymous means that it doesn't really matter that they were nasty to a particular reviewer (except as far as that reviewer is concerned). Am I espousing that reviewers name names? I understand how dicey a prospect that is. Especially with someone who has already shown themselves to be unstable.

So that brings us back to acknowledging that this is a problem without a solution. I know for a fact that there are badly behaved traditionally published authors out there, but it's not surprising at all that this is a much bigger problem with indies. People who have been traditionally published have almost certainly faced rejection before, and received blunt criticism of their work. I don't doubt that many indies go this route specifically to _avoid_ having to deal with criticism or the suggestion their work needs improvement (naively unaware, of course, that publishing is the most direct route to criticism one can take!).

There will always be newbie writers with thin skins. Incompetent writers who aren't prepared for an honest opinion. Self-important writers who think their passion and voice mean more than adhering to basic grammatical rules and craft conventions. There will always be a**holes.

It's a shame that indie authors have earned this reputation amongst reviewers, and it's yet another reason why the traditional model will never become truly obsolete. When all is said and done, gatekeepers are not a bad thing. The knowledge that acting unprofessional could very well harm your relationship with your publisher probably helps keep certain borderline personalities in check. The process of accepting rejection and criticism gracefully, and continuing to improve so that one day you can be published, is an invaluable experience.

Honest reviewers are essential to all authors, especially indie authors. But nobody can control the behavior of those indie authors who have used self-publishing as a way to try and avoid criticism. Not when they can hide behind a cloak of anonymity.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> We can't make excuses for the bad behavior. We can't justify it with saying they don't know better. They do. And if they don't, they have no business publishing.


Amen amen amen.

I don't care if it's a writer, a politician or your boss or neighbor, you cannot tolerate bad behavior. They do it only because they've learned they can get away with it.

It IS a problem with a solution, but it's like rot in that it never completely goes away. The solution is one of continuous maintenance. (And it goes beyond writing and publishing. These people behave like this because they get away with it in other areas of their lives. Don't put up with it there either. And don't reward them with sympathy when they misbehave.)

Camille


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> Would you not work on those things if the critique was kind and thoughtful?


Sure I would. But I assume if I'm paying someone to critique my work, that they are working on it for some set amount of time. If they spend most of that time saying things in a nice way and complimenting me, then I assume I would get less information about what I need to fix than if they were blunt and just listed out: "Here, here, here, this is what doesn't work. Here're some ideas of how to fix it."


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> Sure I would. But I assume if I'm paying someone to critique my work, that they are working on it for some set amount of time. If they spend most of that time saying things in a nice way and complimenting me, then I assume I would get less information about what I need to fix than if they were blunt and just listed out: "Here, here, here, this is what doesn't work. Here're some ideas of how to fix it."


Exactly. When I did script analysis, I simply couldn't afford to do it for the writer - just for managers and producers - because it takes so much longer to write coverage for the writer. Basic coverage for a producing client may cost $75-100, but many charge several hundred for the writer, if they do it at all. (Many won't do it at all - at least not after the first time.)

An interesting thing that happens in Hollywood: smart writers will schmooze the assistant to get a copy of the coverage that was prepared for the producer - because they know it's invaluable. It doesn't pull punches, and it's usually highly subjective and harsh. To a pro, such prejudiced feedback is more valuable than gold because it's a great insight into the mind of the producer.

I myself have come to prefer coverage to critique, but I think that's partly because critique is a teaching tool, and tends to cover the ground on "common wisdom," and wastes time explaining principles I already know. And that's a problem in itself - the knowledge level of the critiquer and the writer is so variable.

Camille


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> It IS a problem with a solution, but it's like rot in that it never completely goes away. The solution is one of continuous maintenance. (And it goes beyond writing and publishing. These people behave like this because they get away with it in other areas of their lives. Don't put up with it there either. And don't reward them with sympathy when they misbehave.)


One person's bad behavior can be called out, not tolerated, etc., but even then there's really no guarantee they won't turn around and behave badly with someone else. And "not tolerating" one person's bad behavior in a way that doesn't include obvious public consequences won't prevent the next person from coming along and behaving badly, too.

When I say this is a problem with no solution, what I mean is that a) we cannot control how other people behave, b) when bad behavior is kept between two private parties and there are no public consequences, not only is the badly behaved person let off the hook, but nobody else is dissuaded from following in their footsteps if that's their inclination, and c) there will always be a**holes.

Saying "don't approve of bad behavior!" is great, but who here actually approves of it? What does not tolerating or putting up with it mean, exactly? In this case, when the poorly behaved writers remain anonymous, what exactly has been done to prevent it from happening in the future?

Yes, as an individual I can call out bad behavior when I see it. But that's certainly not going to stop the rest of the jerks in the world from doing their thing.

To clarify: this doesn't mean I think people should *not* call out bad behavior. It just means that acting like the problem of immature/unstable/unpleasant people can be solved is extremely ambitious--and a poor use of our time and energy!


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> Saying "don't approve of bad behavior!" is great, but who here actually approves of it? What does not tolerating or putting up with it mean, exactly?


As I said earlier, the place where you correct the problem isn't at the end - the cases Julie mentioned were too late.

BUT, when we talk about these things there are two things that happen:

1.) Newbies who aren't prepared for criticism, and have never received it get an alert. It will still blindside them, and hurt a whole lot more than they expect, but the fact that we've had this conversation (and had it several times) means they are a lot less likely to do something stupid when it happens.

2.) When we talk about this and we say "yeah, but they're just newbies...they can't HELP it!" that sends a signal in the opposite direction. Do not reward hissy fits with sympathy in real life - whether it's children or adults. Don't enable it.

When you say "nobody here approves of bad behavior" I have to disagree. Sure, nobody approves of the end result, but the habits and attitudes that lead to it - I see it here all the time. The key is that we are a supportive group and we talk people through it. When somebody says "Those evil mean nasty people have prejudice against Indies!" we don't fan those flames, we talk about handling it like a professional.

But that wasn't always the case. We've had times when people have encouraged others to go "vote down" a bad review, etc. Whenever Lee Goldberg posts here, we could get a real flamewar going, often because someone was "deeply offended" who was then encouraged to feel even more offended.

Righteous Indignation is a useless thing, but it can require help to get it out of your toolbox. This group is very good at calming the waters and being fair - but that's because we have some great moderators, and because the group is pretty dedicated to keeping these subjects before the newbie's eyes.

Camille


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I have to agree that there is no real solution. 

I am pretty much to the point where I thoroughly expect to be harrassed in some way every time I publish a review that is less than 5 stars. 

Once, I thought of adding a page to my blog site called "No Review List" and just list authors that I refuse to read or review in the future. I wouldn't have put a reason in there, but I would think it would be obvious. 

Then, I realized that while it might be a deterrant for some, others would harrass me even more over being listed on the page.  

See, 80% of the "angry" authors only have one book out there.  It's like they can't conceive of the fact that they may publish another book, which I could possibly review, enjoy more, and award more stars.

Take today's post, for instance. Yes, it's a rather scathing review. However, the author responded professionally with:

"I'm bummed it didn't work for you, but I truly appreciate the honesty
of your review. It's the only way for me to grow.

I hope The Patriot Paradox demonstrates my evolution as a writer, and
that it provides a more enjoyable read."

Now, that is a forward thinking, professional author.  He had previously sent his other book to me as a Review Copy. It's on my TBR list.  

Had he thrown a temper tantrum over my review, I would have removed his second book from my TBR list, and never gone near another of his books.  

It's quite possible that I will enjoy his other book. I am certainly willing to give it a read.


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> Yes, as an individual I can call out bad behavior when I see it. But that's certainly not going to stop the rest of the jerks in the world from doing their thing.


Having laws against robbery doesn't stop criminals, but that doesn't mean we get rid of the laws. I realize there will always be abusive, trollish behavior. That is not going to change. I'm not so naive as to think me ranting on a forum will change that. But what I hope it will change is the way many folks do tolerate this behavior when they see it. There was a thread recently here in this forum about how the forum has "changed" as more indie authors have found it and started to hawk their books. Now I think the mods have done a truely exceptional job of policing this forum and preventing the absolute breakdown of decorum I've seen elsewhere. But we need to help them to preserve that. It's little things, such as:

When we see someone complaining about a reviewer giving them a bad review when, upon reading it, the review is perfectly valid, do you:
A. Ignore the thread. Not my problem
B. Pat the poster on the back and tell them to "ignore it. It's just one person's opinion."
C. Pile on. "Damn reviewers are just jealous!"
D. Point out that while the review may be negative, there are valid points.

When someone asked for a critique online, and then gets mad about the feedback, do you ignore them, or remind them that they asked for public feedback?

It's the little things. When it is just one or two people calling out the behavior (say, for example, Red and I) it becomes very easy to just accuse me or Red of being overly critical. It's easy to point at ***** and say ***** is just being mean or whatever because it often seems like I am the only one voicing the negative opinion. From the feedback in this thread, it is obvious I'm not the only one THINKING this way, but it feels like I'm the only one saying it out loud. In this case, the criticism then becomes more about the person pointing out the problems then the problems themselves. But when the community calls out the behavior collectively, it sends a message that the community does not tolerate it. The guilty party, so to speak, can no longer hide behind "***** is picking on me!"


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> When we see someone complaining about a reviewer giving them a bad review when, upon reading it, the review is perfectly valid, do you:
> A. Ignore the thread. Not my problem
> B. Pat the poster on the back and tell them to "ignore it. It's just one person's opinion."
> C. Pile on. "d*mn reviewers are just jealous!"
> D. Point out that while the review may be negative, there are valid points.


It depends on the review and the day.

A: If it's a day from hell and I'm pressed for time.
B: "You can't please all the people all the time." if it sounds like the review was a lower rank because, for whatever reason, it just wasn't the reviewers cup o' tea.
C: If it was "This book SUX! Read Snoopy Brown's book for a better experience!" - written by Charles Brown
D: If it had valid points, then it did. Learn from it.

^ All reviews are not created equal


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> When we see someone complaining about a reviewer giving them a bad review when, upon reading it, the review is perfectly valid, do you:
> A. Ignore the thread. Not my problem
> B. Pat the poster on the back and tell them to "ignore it. It's just one person's opinion."
> C. Pile on. "d*mn reviewers are just jealous!"
> D. Point out that while the review may be negative, there are valid points.


A. That will actually work. If everyone just ignores a thread, it drops out of sight, and that alone sends a message.
B. This one really isn't that bad, especially if the review is something like "I thought this was a romance, but it wasn't." One Star. 
C. This is the worst thing anyone can do.
D. This is a good answer. However, often, unless you have read the book in question, you can't really know if they are "valid points." So many times, though, an author posts about a bad review, but doesn't really point out anything that was incorrect about it. I think they should be asked, "Well, what about that review do you disagree with, specifically?" Get a conversation going. See if there are some "valid points" or if it was all just personal opinion. I tend to give fewer stars in my "Plot/Storyline" section for slow or rambling storylines. That really is a personal preference. Some people don't mind that at all. Therefore, you may be able to agree that your storyline is slow or rambling, but that my not liking it is just a personal, though valid, point.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Arkali said:


> It depends on the review and the day.
> 
> A: If it's a day from hell and I'm pressed for time.
> B: "You can't please all the people all the time." if it sounds like the review was a lower rank because, for whatever reason, it just wasn't the reviewers cup o' tea.
> ...


Actually even in the case of C, I would treat it like a B - that's what B is for. That's the professional way to handle it. (As a matter of fact, I feel that way about option D as well. It's none of my business whether there were valid points either.)

All reviews are not created equal.... but they are all irrelevant to the writer. They were written for the reader.

So I guess I feel that the only appropriate option is B (unless, as Arkali points out, it's not my turn to save the world and then A is the only option.)

Camille


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

> Bad review hits.
> 
> Author: Ow.
> 
> Kindleboards: Chin up, man. Eat some ice cream, learn from the review what you can, and then keep writing.


That's my idealized world.



> Bad review hits.
> 
> Author: OWIE!
> 
> Kindleboards: A bad review? RAWR! Reviewer is clearly stupid/ignorant/impossible to please/didn't sample/expected something else/didn't read book/hates indies. DOWNVOTE!


Sadly, this happens a little too often (though appears to be lessening). Full disclosure: when I first started out, I was guilty as hell about this. I've since grown up a little.

David Dalglish


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Actually even in the case of C, I would treat it like a B - that's what B is for. That's the professional way to handle it. (As a matter of fact, I feel that way about option D as well. It's none of my business whether there were valid points either.)
> 
> All reviews are not created equal.... but they are all irrelevant to the writer. They were written for the reader.
> 
> ...


Heh. I suppose a better break down would be:
A: If it's a day from hell and I'm pressed for time.
I'm not here 
B: Review sez: "It's a western. I hate westerns! 1-star"
Response: "You can't please all the people all the time." if it sounds like the review was a lower rank because, for whatever reason, it just wasn't the reviewers cup o' tea."
My thoughts: If the reviewer didn't want a western, perhaps they shouldn't have gotten a book with a gun, a horse, and a cowboy on it.
C: Review sez: "This book SUX! (and the rest of the review is much the same)"
Response: "Ignore it. Consider the source." 
My thoughts: Sorry. If you want me to take your opinion seriously, write like you're literate.
D: Review sez: Review is well thought out, even if it's just two or three sentences. 
Response: They brought up some good points. Analyze it and see if you can take anything away from it.
My thoughts: Dang, that sucks. Hope you have some chocolate, ice cream, or chocolate ice cream.



Half-Orc said:


> David sez..


Too funny!


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

Arkali said:


> ^ All reviews are not created equal


Ergo why I added the disclaimer about the review actually being a valid review, not a "U SUCK" trolling.


----------



## Guest (Oct 26, 2010)

David:

You know what the weird thing is about the "they obviously didn't sample" comments (because yes, I've seen those too) I usually see this comment in regards to reviews on free books or 99 cent books.  I don't know if I have ever seen it in a case where someone paid market prices, so to speak (and I could have just missed it, it may have happened on higher priced books.

But this is the weird part, the generally consensus is...and the actual selling point for the 99 cent pricing...is that people will just buy for 99 cents and not sample.  The entire goal of the 99 cent price is in fact to get people to buy reflexively without sampling.  So you engage in an action specifically designed to get people to buy without sampling, and then whine when they give you a bad review because they "obviously didn't sample" the book before buying.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But this is the weird part, the generally consensus is...and the actual selling point for the 99 cent pricing...is that people will just buy for 99 cents and not sample. *The entire goal of the 99 cent price is in fact to get people to buy reflexively without sampling.* So you engage in an action specifically designed to get people to buy without sampling, and then whine when they give you a bad review because they "obviously didn't sample" the book before buying.


Yep. I've argued this, and also said "Don't think of it as practically giving your work away - think of it as a paid sample." I don't agree with bad reviews based purely on the traditional free sample, but the minute money changes hands, well, the consumer has the right to review.

Theoretically, it could still be valid criticism. If I'm disappointed because there was a vampire on your cover but inside there's not a single thing with fangs - well. That's a valid complaint, traditionally sampled or not.


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> _I don't see this behavior out of traditionally published writers._


What, you don't recall the Anne Rice Meltdown of a few years ago? My agent sent me the review she posted on Amazon because it got so quickly deleted. What a hoot. I wrote to her about it, and we got a little correspondence going for a few days.

How about the Wall Street Journal expose of all the underhanded "professional" authors trashing each other anonymously on Amazon, which suddenly exposed their real names during the Glitch of 2004?

I rate reviewers and observe their behavior just as you rate authors and observe theirs. If I think "tone" is important (or anything else), I don't read reviews and I won't solicit them from that reviewer. It's a personal choice, like the books you decline to review. You can deal with your business as you like, and people can behave however they will, and we can all police each other, you me, and me you, just as you suggest. I actually did that, per your suggestion. Done and done.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nell Gavin said:


> What, you don't recall the Anne Rice Meltdown of a few years ago? My agent sent me the review she posted on Amazon because it got so quickly deleted. What a hoot. I wrote to her about it, and we got a little correspondence going for a few days.
> 
> How about the Wall Street Journal expose of all the underhanded "professional" authors trashing each other anonymously on Amazon, which suddenly exposed their real names during the Glitch of 2004?
> 
> I rate reviewers and observe their behavior just as you rate authors and observe theirs. If I think "tone" is important (or anything else), I don't read reviews and I won't solicit them from that reviewer. It's a personal choice, like the books you decline to review. You can deal with your business as you like, and people can behave however they will, and we can all police each other, you me, and me you, just as you suggest. I actually did that, per your suggestion. Done and done.


Ummm, nobody said you had to like a review or a reviewer. That misses the point entirely (and I mean really completely and totally entirely). Nobody said you had a duty to submit to a particular reviewer or read them. They only said that you should behave in a professional (and not abusive) manner toward them.

The fact that Anne Rice did something stupid and venal doesn't make it okay. (And the fact that they took it down really really fast is a good sign that it is NOT considered okay by anybody else either.)

Julie pointed out that she, as a reviewer, has never been treated badly by traditionally published authors, but that she is abused regularly by self-published authors. That's a valid point - even if it were unusual it would still be valid. Unfortunately it is not that unusual. (Although a part of the reason might be that people who behave in an abusive and unprofessional manner are less likely to be published in traditional publishing.)

There is a reason why that Amazon glitch caused a scandal. Those people who were behaving badly got caught, and it caused them pain and embarrassment - which they deserved.

Camille


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

It is my firm belief that you should not publish anything anywhere that you are ashamed or embarrassed to put your name on.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Two points:

How much difference is there between a person who self-publishes and calls themself an author, and a person who creates a review website and calls themself a reviewer?  IMO, not much, and in both cases, each individual has to be judged by the quality of work they are outputting.  BTW, I think it's obvious by the respect given to the two reviewers involved in this discussion, that they've been judged favorably.

And:

While I empathize wth Julie, and NO ONE should be threatened like that for expressing their opinion, the title of this thread, and it hanging around for days, is beginning to hack me off.  It is a small percentage of self-published authors who have acted badly, so I don't see the need for readers and internet wanderers to stop by these forums and see this broad-brush accusation hanging out there from a reviewer.  Especially since the 'culprits' haven't been named, and therefore we're all under suspicion.

Just my four cents.

(Edited for spelling)


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Wellll, I'd rather she didn't name names.

There are too many people here, and too many in the world at large for anybody to feel they are under a cloud of suspicion.  If whoever did it is here, well, they should feel ashamed of themselves - and perhaps they do.  Which is fine and it's good that names weren't named.  If they don't feel ashamed.... well, they can speak up if they want to.

Your first point is dead on, though - we are all responsible for our own output.  But we have to remember who the audience for that output is. Reviewers are judged by the readers.  The writers are not in the equation.  If a reviewer is unfair, cruel, dumb, nasty... their readers can judge for themselves.  And they will.

I think a part of the reaction is that it feels unfair - reviewers get to judge writers but writers don't get to judge reviewers.  It's not a reciprocal relationship - and it isn't a relationship at all.  The relationship is between the reviewer and the reader.  There is also a relationship between the writer and the reader - and so there is where you fix it.  Give the reader a wonderful experience, and you don't have to worry about anything else.

Camille


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

jbh13md said:


> It is my firm belief that you should not publish anything anywhere that you are ashamed or embarrassed to put your name on.


I think the problem is that some people are publishing things they _ought_ to be ashamed of, but are not.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Writers _do_ get to judge reviewers.

Prior to sending a review copy to any reviewer, the writer should take a look at previous reviews and decide if that reviewer is a good fit for their work.

Any writer looking at my blog should be able to tell that I am harsh on books that have not been edited for grammar, spelling, etc. So, if you know your book has those kind of problems, I am not the reviewer for you. If you look deeper, you could probably discern what types of books are my favorites; however, I do tend to have rather eclectic reading habits, so that may not be as easy as it sounds. 

I think the biggest issue for Indies is that there are too few reviewers willing to review their books. This is probably why I have been sent non-fiction and romance books, even though I specifically state that I do not read or review those.

I have heard quite often that I am "harsh" and "brutally honest" and, well, you get the picture. However, if you read my reviews, you will see that I do strive to say something complimentary about most of the books I review. The exceptions are those that are filled with errors.

Edited to add: I do purchase some books. In those cases, I guess you are correct that the author did not have an opportunity to "judge the reviewer." I guess at some point, it really is just up to the readers to judge whether the reviewer is reviewing to _their_ tastes or not.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

RedAdept said:


> I have heard quite often that I am "harsh" and "brutally honest" and, well, you get the picture.


I, for one, appreciate this. I get the RSS feed from your blog, and as long as your review is favorable - and I am interested in the book description - I almost always pick up the book without even bothering with a sample.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

swolf said:


> While I emphasize with Julie, and NO ONE should be threatened like that for expressing their opinion, the title of this thread, and it hanging around for days, is beginning to hack me off. It is a small percentage of self-published authors who have acted badly, so I don't see the need for readers and internet wanderers to stop by these forums and see this broad-brush accusation hanging out there from a reviewer. Especially since the 'culprits' haven't been named, and therefore we're all under suspicion.
> 
> Just my four cents.


I'm assuming you meant to "empathize" with Julie? Of course, you are welcome to emphasize her, too (with her consent). 

Anyway, I agree with you on the title. Perhaps we can persuade her to change it to something a little less antagonistic? I do understand completely where she is coming from, and that she most likely titled it that way to get attention called to an important issue. So, it was effective at the time.


----------



## MichelleR (Feb 21, 2009)

I've seen a handful of traditionally published authors behave very poorly -- and it becomes a scandal every time. Book blogs dine on it for days, if not weeks. It's also not the norm and so each time reflects more on the author then on his or her colleagues. Indie writers are just finding their voices, their reputations in a skeptical world, and so it's a lot easier for people to wonder if the unprofessional example is the norm.


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

MichelleR said:


> I've seen a handful of traditionally published authors behave very poorly -- and it becomes a scandal every time. Book blogs dine on it for days, if not weeks. It's also not the norm and so each time reflects more on the author then on his or her colleagues. Indie writers are just finding their voices, their reputations in a skeptical world, and so it's a lot easier for people to wonder if the unprofessional example is the norm.


Yes, there are plenty of examples of traditionally published authors behaving badly--and nobody hesitates to name names in that arena! Public shaming will never stop new examples from popping up, I'm guessing, but at least traditionally published authors face real consequences for their actions.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> Any writer looking at my blog should be able to tell that I am harsh on books that have not been edited for grammar, spelling, etc. So, if you know your book has those kind of problems, I am not the reviewer for you.


Don't you mean 'those kinds of problems'?


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

swolf said:


> Don't you mean 'those kinds of problems'?


You caught me!


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

T.L.:

It all depends on how much influence you have, and who you are trying to influence.

You may have no influence at all on the offender.  It's too late for some people.  Where you usually have influence is on the witnesses.  So if someone behaves badly, you can call them on it in whatever way you feel comfortable with.  IMHO, your approach should be reasonable and fair minded.  That approach is not only what you should do anyway, it also has more clout with the onlookers. 

Sometimes you come across a group of bad apples who are into supporting each other's bad behavior. You have no influence with that. The offender is usually trying to impress his or her followers, and you just look like red meat.  If you are an outsider to this group, YOU aren't the person to influence these folks.  In that situation, all you can do is continue to be reasonable and fair minded, and bow out.  (Although often you'll find you get private messages and other indications that you had an influence on the silent onlookers.)

You can only influence the people who respect you.  And most people are not poisonous.  Most people just aren't thinking, or are going along with somebody else, and so most of the time, your strongest influence is just in what we've talked in the past couple of posts here.  When someone rails against a reviewer, you take care that your sympathy does not encourage bad behavior, but actually moves people toward good behavior.  That's all.

Just recognize what influence you have, be responsible with it, (and beware of being sucked into appeasing a poisonous personality who can't be influenced).

Camille


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> When we see someone complaining about a reviewer giving them a bad review when, upon reading it, the review is perfectly valid, do you:
> A. Ignore the thread. Not my problem
> B. Pat the poster on the back and tell them to "ignore it. It's just one person's opinion."
> C. Pile on. "d*mn reviewers are just jealous!"
> ...


A. I tend to ignore a lot of them, if I feel I am of no help to the situation...or I'm reading along in the thread and other people have already replied with good answers. 
B. and C. both depend on the review and the maturity of the reviewer. Had a similar instance recently where someone SLAMMED every title of a friend of mine, launched a personal attack on her, and when I looked at their other reviews, they were basically all the same...and the only 4-5 star reviews went to books about writing, so I just _assumed _ that they were jealous wannabe authors themselves (or actually a jealous wannabe author and her sock puppet.) 
D. If it is a well thought out review, maybe they can take it with a grain of salt...and just learn something from it.

Also there's a sad and sick trend of people from one political/religious/sociological agenda bashing books about the opposite political/religious/sociological POV. It's dumb really, I always just ignore those. Live and let live, people. 

All in all, I think it all comes down to professionalism. If we want to be treated and respected as professionals, then we have to act more professional.

Julie's initial post about the author ranting that they "aren't doing this for money" reminded me of something: 
If we act amateurish, we're going to be seen as amateurs.

When I was studying ballet professionally, I had a very tough instructor who was a retired prima ballerina. In reprimanding me for not kicking as high as I possibly could, she grabbed the heel of my foot and lifted it over my head. She smacked one of my friends with a spiral-bound notebook and yelled at him to point his toe. And, she once told a girl named Candi that a _jar of candy_ sitting on the piano had more sense than she did.

You know how we dealt with things like that? We'd all go out for coffee after class and sit and laugh about it...but we'd also bust our butts every morning, in her class. We learned from it. We improved.

About a year later, I participated in a community theater presentation of _Guys N' Dolls._ While practicing one of the "dolls" dance routines, our director (a nice grandmotherly type of lady) pointed out one little mistake some girl made, and she threw her tap shoes across the room at her and stormed out in tears.

I think that's why "hobbyist" is becoming such a dirty word among self-publishers, and nobody wants to be seen as that. Hobbyists kind of hold the mentality "well I only do this as a hobby so....I'll do what I want..." and act like nobody should criticize their work, because it's only for their F&F who will love it regardless. 
(but I'm of the opinion that anything worth doing is worth doing well.)

If we act like "hobbyists" we'll never be taken seriously. If we act like professionals, then yes. We will be.


----------



## Guest (Oct 27, 2010)

swolf said:


> How much difference is there between a person who self-publishes and calls themself an author, and a person who creates a review website and calls themself a reviewer? IMO, not much, and in both cases, each individual has to be judged by the quality of work they are outputting. BTW, I think it's obvious by the respect given to the two reviewers involved in this discussion, that they've been judged favorably.


This is another whole ball of wax that I have talked about in the past, but didn't want to get into in this thread. I've long told authors that a review is only as good as the _credibility of the reviewer,_ and not to send their books for free to every Jane Doe with a blog just because she said she would review it. While it isn't so much of an issue for ebook authors, the reality is most book reviewers still want physical books, and mailing free books to every reviewer you find without thinking about the quality of the reviews is bad business.

If it makes you feel any better, I have taken some reviewers to task in the past for being nothing more than "book moochers." Getting people to send them free books and then posting three sentence "reviews" on Amazon that all pretty much say the same thing.

But if a person makes a decision to send someone a book, that person has to take the responsibility for knowing what type of review to expect and not getting bent out of shape when it happens.


----------



## Guest (Oct 27, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> The other thing - what if we see a behavior that isn't acceptable or is questionable, we confront the person or state an opinion regarding it, and get lambasted? How do we handle it? If that comment creates a backlash, what then? I'm not saying we shouldn't call people on their behavior - just the opposite. I'm asking how to handle the response to the criticism of the behavior. Thanks!


You cannot control the actions of others. You can only control your response to it. You restate the facts, stay focused on the behavior and not the individual. And then you move on.

Or, as an alternative, you come find ***** and let me deal with it.


----------



## traceya (Apr 26, 2010)

Reading through this there's still a big part of me that thinks we should name and shame those who so obviously cross the line from maybe being a little snarky or upset about your review to someone who actively threatens and harrasses you.

Indie authors should not get kid glove treatment - from anyone - because I'd be willing to be that every single one of us deeply wants to be a PROFESSIONAL author, independently published or not.

One of the biggest problems that I see with Indie publishing is that there's an awful lot of people publishing books that really shouldn't ever have been published in the first place - maybe I'm guilty of the same, I hope not, but the fact is it's now way too easy to slap something together and post it as an ebook and then expect everyone to love it and rave about it - not gonna happen and when they're called on it there's obviously a large[ish] percentage who behave very badly because they were bluntly told their book isn't up to scratch.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

traceya said:


> ...Indie authors should not get kid glove treatment - from anyone - because I'd be willing to be that every single one of us deeply wants to be a PROFESSIONAL author, independently published or not.
> 
> One of the biggest problems that I see with Indie publishing is that there's an awful lot of people publishing books that really shouldn't ever have been published in the first place ....


Actually I think one of the problems is that there are so many different reasons for publishing now, it affects expectations.

I think in a few years, Indie publishing will shake out into different groups, just the way traditional publishing has. Before Kindle, there was small press, major publishing houses, academic presses, packagers, amateur presses.... Each type has its following and expectations, and eventually we'll all work out ways to differentiate ourselves from each other.

Just as there were people who look for ratty grungy covers for underground poetry, and mimeographed and velo-bound volumes for fanzines, there will be styles and covers to help the audience for each type of writing to find itself. It just takes time.

Once people find their peers and their audience, they'll will be able to find success there (and even money) and we'll have less problem with everybody jockeying for position in the same places. Just as academic writers and poets don't care to send their books to a genre reviewer, I expect a kind of in-group snobbism to break out in the new categories of publishing, and they'll be less interested in those who aren't interested in them.

Call me a pollyanna, but I really think things like this are like water - they find their own level.

Camille


----------



## Jasmine Giacomo Author (Apr 21, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The most I ever get back is, "Sorry you feel you can't review the book. Thank you for letting us know so that we can update our records." or something to that effect.


One huge benefit of investing in Costco-sized packs of these pre-planned responses is that when the time comes to use one, you save yourself the time and effort of writing out your own whiny, immature rant, looking unprofessional, burning a bridge with a reviewer, and possibly getting your childishness posted as an example of what not to do. It's win/win!


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2010)

Jasmine Giacomo said:


> One huge benefit of investing in Costco-sized packs of these pre-planned responses is that when the time comes to use one, you save yourself the time and effort of writing out your own whiny, immature rant, looking unprofessional, burning a bridge with a reviewer, and possibly getting your childishness posted as an example of what not to do. It's win/win!


Maybe I should start selling discount packages of pre-written responses to different situations? This may be a huge, untapped market...


----------



## Sharlow (Dec 20, 2009)

T.L. Haddix said:


> You mean the drunk driving thing - the yellow license plate? I don't know. As someone whose family (father, mother, sister) was massacred by a drunk driver, I have no problem with it. If you drive drunk, you give up the right to privacy - my opinion. I'm not talking about buzzed driving, but well over the limit drunk.
> 
> I know, off topic, but I just couldn't let that pass.


I agree that it was done with good intentions, and it does have it's use, but these day's all they seem to do is remove the constitution from our modern laws. Some where it's got to stop. I'm really not the one to decided where, but I do have a vote that I hope still counts for something if they ever try that in my state. I guess I'm more afraid of losing my rights these days...


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sharlow said:


> I agree that it was done with good intentions, and it does have it's use, but these day's all they seem to do is remove the constitution from our modern laws. Some where it's got to stop. I'm really not the one to decided where, but I do have a vote that I hope still counts for something if they ever try that in my state. I guess I'm more afraid of losing my rights these days...


Ack - derail, I know. But - what right? The only thing I can think of that you're referring to is driving, and sorry, no - driving is a privilege, not a right. My apologies if you were talking about something else.


----------



## Steph H (Oct 28, 2008)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Maybe I should start selling discount packages of pre-written responses to different situations? This may be a huge, untapped market...


You've heard of Hallmark, of course? You could be Bardsagemark...  Bardmark? Sagemark?


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2010)

Steph H said:


> You've heard of Hallmark, of course? You could be Bardsagemark...  Bardmark? Sagemark?


*Bard's Mark*
_When You Care Enough to Send Something That Won't Make You Sound Like a Flaming Idiot_​


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *Bard's Mark*
> _When You Care Enough to Send Something That Won't Make You Sound Like a Flaming Idiot_​


----------



## JL Bryan (Aug 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> *Bard's Mark*
> _When You Care Enough to Send Something That Won't Make You Sound Like a Flaming Idiot_​


Could be a huge market


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Ack - derail, I know. But - what right? The only thing I can think of that you're referring to is driving, and sorry, no - driving is a privilege, not a right. My apologies if you were talking about something else.


You've been told that lie so many times you believe it without actually checking. Many courts have ruled that using public roads is right


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

Arkali said:


> Ack - derail, I know. But - what right? The only thing I can think of that you're referring to is driving, and sorry, no - driving is a privilege, not a right. My apologies if you were talking about something else.


He was probably referring to the right to privacy. I don't know if driving is necessarily a privilege. The problem is that some people do have to drive. Unless working and earning a living is a privilege too. And then I suppose just living, by that same logic, is a privilege as well.

Speaking of derail, this is exactly why we need trains in this country (America). In a society where everyone has a car, every drunk is bound to have a car as well. I do not think the answer is to put a identifying plate on an offender's automobile. Instead, we need trains. An automobile with an identifying plate can crash into other cars and run over people just as well as one without. Trains would solve this problem, they would be more clean and more efficient, and they're cool. And if you're worried about privacy, you could pay a little extra, rent a private box in a luxury locomotive, and drink all you wanted without endangering anyone (unless you are pregnant or are on your way to operate heavy machinery, of course). Trains are the answer to this argument. Both of you should put your difference of opinion aside and channel your energies into writing to your congresspeople and representatives demanding mass locomotive transit.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> You've been told that lie so many times you believe it without actually checking. Many courts have ruled that using public roads is right


USING public roads is a right (the right to travel) - driving on them is not. Certainly driving if your vision is impaired or while intoxicated is not a right, as you're putting other people in danger. It's a matter that's still being debated, but I'm fine if we just agree to disagree.

Regarding trains - sorry. I don't want to have trains running everywhere. There's a reason I live in the country


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> USING public roads is a right (the right to travel) - driving on them is not.


Sure it is. According to the courts.


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

Arkali said:


> USING public roads is a right (the right to travel) - driving on them is not. Certainly driving if your vision is impaired or while intoxicated is not a right, as you're putting other people in danger. It's a matter that's still being debated, but I'm fine if we just agree to disagree.
> 
> Regarding trains - sorry. I don't want to have trains running everywhere. There's a reason I live in the country


Bah! They still have the country in Europe. Your hermitage would be safe. Just put up some signs saying "Beware of train-hater" and no one would bother you a bit.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

I'd like to see more 'autotrains', where if, for example, you wanted to go from New York to Philadephia, you would just drive up onto the appropriate autotrain at the appropriate time, and after a 200mph trip, drive off the train a half hour later, refreshed from your nap.


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Arkali said:


> Ack - derail, I know. But - what right? The only thing I can think of that you're referring to is driving, and sorry, no - driving is a privilege, not a right. My apologies if you were talking about something else.


I'm guessing that Sharlow is referring to the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishments. Many people view humiliation as "cruel" and/or "unusual."


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

swolf said:


> You've been told that lie so many times you believe it without actually checking. Many courts have ruled that using public roads is right


And some courts have ruled exactly the opposite. It's really a debatable topic still. Just a few months ago, the IL Supreme Court ruled that they could continue away driving licenses from kids who were drinking under the age of 21. They weren't even driving, just drinking. I don't think there's been any decisive ruling on whether it's a right or a privilege.

Also, the autotrain idea sounds excellent. I would love one of those around here...


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

swolf said:


> I'd like to see more 'autotrains', where if, for example, you wanted to go from New York to Philadephia, you would just drive up onto the appropriate autotrain at the appropriate time, and after a 200mph trip, drive off the train a half hour later, refreshed from your nap.


A train by any other name would be as sweet. Both Zelazny and Heinlein predicted something of the sort (In "The Roads Must Roll" for Heinlein and in "The Dream Master" for Zelazny, if your curious). Also, Ray Bradbury, one of our greatest American authors, wrote an essay detailing his love for trains in his book "Too Soon from the Cave, Too Far from the Stars." If so many brilliant science fiction authors thought trains and train-like mass transit was cool, how can we deny that they and it are, in fact, cool? There is an inherent awesomeness embodied by the noble locomotive and its variants that, in my opinion, is undeniable. The obvious deficiencies in automobile travel are apparent to all of us. Drunk driving or any sort of driving while impaired is just one of them. If such can make us question our basic rights and raise confusion as to whether we can make use of public property or not, isn't it a sign that it's time to move on to exploring avenues of progress we callously cast aside to follow the dreams of Henry Ford? Henry Ford was an anti-semite and profiteer. Shame on him and shame on his little monster, the Model T.

Trains and/or train-like transport FTW.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> And some courts have ruled exactly the opposite. It's really a debatable topic still. Just a few months ago, the IL Supreme Court ruled that they could continue away driving licenses from kids who were drinking under the age of 21. They weren't even driving, just drinking. I don't think there's been any decisive ruling on whether it's a right or a privilege.


Just because something is taken away, doesn't mean it isn't a right. For example, we don't allow people convicted of crimes to bear arms. Putting people in jail deprives them of their right to liberty, and executing them deprives them of their right to life.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

jbh13md said:


> A train by any other name would be as sweet. Both Zelazny and Heinlein predicted something of the sort (In "The Roads Must Roll" for Heinlein and in "The Dream Master" for Zelazny, if your curious). Also, Ray Bradbury, one of our greatest American authors, wrote an essay detailing his love for trains in his book "Too Soon from the Cave, Too Far from the Stars." If so many brilliant science fiction authors thought trains and train-like mass transit was cool, how can we deny that they and it are, in fact, cool? There is an inherent awesomeness embodied by the noble locomotive and its variants that, in my opinion, is undeniable. The obvious deficiencies in automobile travel are apparent to all of us. Drunk driving or any sort of driving while impaired is just one of them. If such can make us question our basic rights and raise confusion as to whether we can make use of public property or not, isn't it a sign that it's time to move on to exploring avenues of progress we callously cast aside to follow the dreams of Henry Ford? Henry Ford was an anti-semite and profiteer. Shame on him and shame on his little monster, the Model T.
> 
> Trains and/or train-like transport FTW.


Just so you know, Arlo Guthrie's 'City of New Orleans' was playing in my head as I read that.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

swolf said:


> Just because something is taken away, doesn't mean it isn't a right. For example, we don't allow people convicted of crimes to bear arms. Putting people in jail deprives them of their right to liberty, and executing them deprives them of their right to life.


Ok, I see what you're saying. So what would be the difference between the right to drive or the privilege to drive? If they can take away your right to drive for so many different reasons (can't pass the test, drink, bad eyesight, or unrelated reasons - like the underage drinking), or if you can't even afford a car/gas/maintenance, then what is the difference between having a right or a privilege? Personally I think the fact that they can take away your license for unrelated reasons, and they can refuse to provide money to buy a car makes it a privilege. Not everyone is allowed to drive, or has the money to do so.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> Ok, I see what you're saying. So what would be the difference between the right to drive or the privilege to drive? If they can take away your right to drive for so many different reasons (can't pass the test, drink, bad eyesight, or unrelated reasons - like the underage drinking), or if you can't even afford a car/gas/maintenance, then what is the difference between having a right or a privilege? Personally I think the fact that they can take away your license for unrelated reasons, and they can refuse to provide money to buy a car makes it a privilege. Not everyone is allowed to drive, or has the money to do so.


This. I'd also get into the whole thing about the right to use a road not being synonymous with driving, but I don't really want to beat my head against the wall.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Arkali said:


> I'd also get into the whole thing about the right to use a road not being synonymous with driving, but I don't really want to beat my head against the wall.


I agree. Claiming that 'using the road' and 'driving' are not synonymous is very similar to beating one's head against the wall.

I don't recommend either of them if you want people to think you're sane.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

swolf said:


> I agree. Claiming that 'using the road' and 'driving' are not synonymous is very similar to beating one's head against the wall.
> 
> I don't recommend either of them if you want people to think you're sane.


You can use a road without driving. You can walk, ride a bike, and use public transit. Lots of people survive just fine without owning a car.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

swolf said:


> Just because something is taken away, doesn't mean it isn't a right. For example, we don't allow people convicted of crimes to bear arms. Putting people in jail deprives them of their right to liberty, and executing them deprives them of their right to life.


I should add that I totally understand what you mean - driving could be seen as a right in that most people are allowed to do it, except if that right gets taken away for one of the reasons I listed, but to me, it sounds like we're all describing the same situation in different words. If you can pass the test and afford a car & insurance, you are allowed to drive, but if you break the law in some way, that right can be taken away. I think all Arkali was saying was that the ability to drive should be taken away in some instances - like drunk driving...which it is. Whether you call it a right or a privilege, we're still describing the same thing.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Jessica Billings said:


> I should add that I totally understand what you mean - driving could be seen as a right in that most people are allowed to do it, except if that right gets taken away for one of the reasons I listed, but to me, it sounds like we're all describing the same situation in different words. If you can pass the test and afford a car & insurance, you are allowed to drive, but if you break the law in some way, that right can be taken away. I think all Arkali was saying was that the ability to drive should be taken away in some instances - like drunk driving...which it is. Whether you call it a right or a privilege, we're still describing the same thing.


Exactly. One person's right to drive does not trump my right to safety. If you have proven by your own actions that you aren't responsible enough to drive, then I have no problem with the government taking away that right, or privilege, or whatever you want to call it.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I agree that driving in this country is a right. Like any right, it can be taken away if you don't follow the rules.

It is your right to send your child to public school. It is your child's right to attend that school. However, if you child brings a gun to said school, then your child will be expelled, thus having their "right" revoked.

Personally, as I stated before, I see making drunk drivers have a different colored plate as virtually the same as have a "registered sex offender" list.

As far as "cruel and unusual punishment", well, I tend to think that America has taken that concept too far. We tend to _baby_ our criminals to the point that people just aren't as concerned with punishment for crimes as they used to be.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

My right to live trumps some jerks right to Drink and drive.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

RedAdept said:


> I agree that driving in this country is a right. Like any right, it can be taken away if you don't follow the rules.


It's not a right. It's a privilege. You can take away privileges, not rights.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

pidgeon92 said:


> It's not a right. It's a privilege. You can take away privileges, not rights.


But you can take away a right. The constitution gives all of us the "right to bear arms".

Now, go commit a felony and see if that "right" is not taken away from you.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> As far as "cruel and unusual punishment", well, I tend to think that America has taken that concept too far. We tend to _baby_ our criminals to the point that people just aren't as concerned with punishment for crimes as they used to be.


You are so right.


----------



## jbh13md (Aug 1, 2010)

If only the constitution promised us something more useful than arms (like mass transit and trains)! I have no need and no desire for a gun or any other weapon for that matter, but I need transport to get to work. And so do boozers. After all, what's worse than a belligerent alcoholic? Why, a jobless belligerent alcoholic! I don't think Americans are so much soft on punishment as we are tired of our punishments not solving the problems of crime and irresponsibility in a progressive way. We have lots of people in prison and yet not very many people rehabilitated. We take a felon's right to vote away as well as his right to legally bear arms, but so what? If we do not teach people to value the right to vote, what has the criminal lost but something he didn't care enough to cherish in the first place? I don't think a colorful license plate or a sex offenders list are bad things necessarily, but these measures by themselves and uncoupled with education, prevention, rehabilitation, and constructive alternatives are a waste of time. For instance: Why drink and drive when you can instead go to the bar by train, drink all you want, and then return home by train? Only a madman would willfully choose to endanger himself and others when an easy second option is available and it is that man that belongs in a prison or a mental hospital.


----------



## terryr (Apr 24, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> As far as "cruel and unusual punishment", well, I tend to think that America has taken that concept too far. We tend to _baby_ our criminals to the point that people just aren't as concerned with punishment for crimes as they used to be.


Not only that, if you're a really good criminal, you get offered book deals, movie deals, have TV shows and video games made about you, and are guaranteed immortality forever because of it, inspiring other criminals, in my personal opinion. So even when they get throw in jail, where's the punishment? They should be obliterated from history, shunned, forgotten forever instead of being made into a franchise or cultural icons. Gahh. I'm sorry, but that aspect has always driven me mad.


----------



## Glenn Bullion (Sep 28, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> But you can take away a right. The constitution gives all of us the "right to bear arms".
> 
> Now, go commit a felony and see if that "right" is not taken away from you.


In Neil Patrick Harris voice: Challenge accepted!


----------



## brucesarte (Oct 11, 2010)

Wow Julie... that really bites!

I can tell you that since I do dual citizenship as an author and a publisher, that I get some of the >cough< feedback from authors when I send the all too familiar (we've all gotten them!) rejection letters.

I've gotten the traditional "go f*** yourself" and the always amusing "my book is better than yours" as if they actually read my books... and my favorite "you don't know anything the books you publish are crap" -- so why would you want me to publish your book? :/

Chin up Julie, many authors are thin skinned, but many of us are realistic and work very hard at our craft (of which you seem to be one!)


Bruce


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> Wow, this thread is just going loop-de-loop all over the place, but in an interesting, intellectual way.
> 
> The way I see drunk driving is pretty harsh. If someone drives drunk, they deserve whatever punishment they get. It is a stupid thing to do, it is usually a repeated offense, and a lot of people don't see it as a crime. They don't understand how serious the offense is. The woman who killed my parents and sister served about 18 months in a soft facility. I've said for a long time now that if I ever wanted to kill someone, I'd do it in a car and then sit there and get drunk before the cops came. I don't drink, so it probably wouldn't take much. Some of you may remember the Carrollton, Kentucky bus crash from back in the 1980s. Twenty-seven lives lost in a fiery crash, and the guy got out of jail a few years back. Twenty-seven families whose lives were impacted, twenty-seven sets of friends who were scarred, having to live without their loved ones. I have no sympathy for drunk drivers.
> 
> ...


Don't apologize  I agree 100% with you.

The only issue I have with sex offender registries is that not all sex offenders are created equal. A serial rapist is a far different animal than the 18 year old dating the 16 year old. They've been dating for two years and the parents have always hated him, and now that he's an ADULT they can do something about it. There was a case a couple of years ago where some nutcase decided he was going to start killing sex offenders. Three kids died - their only "crime" was dating the wrong girl. I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with it if whether or not they should be on the registry was part of their sentence as opposed to automatic. I'd like to think people would be intelligent about it.

Anyway, that said, I definitely agree about our penal system.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

Yeah you can even get on the list for urinating in public or some other fairly innocuous thing. They should keep it for serious offenses


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> Oh, I absolutely agree. It always saddens me to see a young kid put on the list for being with their girlfriend or boyfriend who is only a couple years younger than them. That is nowhere near a crime in my book. Bad judgment, perhaps, but does anyone really have good judgment when they are 18 or 19?


I doubt it. Even the kids that are "mature for their age" are still pretty stupid. If they aren't, they've had a hard, hard life, which is even sadder.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Yes, the sex offender thing can be a bit extreme. A kid in Florida is on it now because his 16 year old girl friend sent him an explicit photo of herself and after they broke up he circulated it. Got charged with child pornography and is on the registered offender list now. 

Clearly, he's not a dangerous sex offender. He should be on probation for a couple of years perhaps, but to be on a lifelong list is too harsh.


----------

