# Speaking of Agents ... Here's an Example of the Bad Side of Agents and Editors



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Check out parts 1, 2, and 3.

I found this story on Dean Wesley Smith's blog.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

I agree, Maria. Updated.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

FYI, Donald Maass has already responded in the comments section in part three.

PT Barnum's famous saying comes to mind here, although the editor-wife sounds somewhat incompetent, which could explain a lot of this. As for the Donald I queried him a number of times without his ever suggesting editing services to me.

IMO agents are no different from the rest of us. I had no ethical problems with my first, my second, despite being very well known, quickly revealed himself to be a snake, and my third agent has been very professional in the four or five days we've been partnered up.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Wow. Thanks for sharing this, Moses.


----------



## NoahMullette-Gillman (Jul 29, 2010)

Chilling!


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Thanks for this. I've met Donald Maass--took a class with him, and also submitted my work. And I've been to the Surrey Writers' Conference. It's one of the better ones.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

Wow!  Fascinating stuff.  And this guy that's implicated (i'm not mentioning names any more), doesn't he run these writer encounters where young wannabes flock as they try to make it in the writing biz?


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Eric C said:


> FYI, Donald Maass has already responded in the comments section in part three.
> 
> PT Barnum's famous saying comes to mind here, although the editor-wife sounds somewhat incompetent, which could explain a lot of this. As for the Donald I queried him a number of times without his ever suggesting editing services to me.
> 
> IMO agents are no different from the rest of us. I had no ethical problems with my first, my second, despite being very well known, quickly revealed himself to be a snake, and my third agent has been very professional in the four or five days we've been partnered up.


He never suggested editing services to me either.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

callingcrow said:


> Wow! Fascinating stuff. And this guy that's implicated (i'm not mentioning names any more), doesn't he run these writer encounters where young wannabes flock as they try to make it in the writing biz?


I went to a workshop he offered in Dallas. It was very useful. A lot of professional romance writers attended--what a fun bunch they are!!! Most of the writers in attendance were experienced.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Ironically, I love his books and recommend them to writers.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Wow.  I don't even know what to think.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

SuzanneTyrpak said:


> I went to a workshop he offered in Dallas. It was very useful. A lot of professional romance writers attended--what a fun bunch they are!!! Most of the writers in attendance were experienced.


Hmmm. Well, maybe I'll leave the hermitage, get a haircut, and go on down and sign up. But first I need to sell a bunch of books.


----------



## willowpolson (Nov 9, 2010)

So disappointing. Wow. I'm stunned that an agency with that huge a reputation, especially for my genre, is running a scam like that.

If the author had only followed this one simple rule: Never, ever pay an agent or publisher in advance for anything. Period. If they ask for money up front, they're a scam. Run away, and tell your friends.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

willowpolson said:


> So disappointing. Wow. I'm stunned that an agency with that huge a reputation, especially for my genre, is running a scam like that.
> 
> If the author had only followed this one simple rule: Never, ever pay an agent or publisher in advance for anything. Period. If they ask for money up front, they're a scam. Run away, and tell your friends.


Hey Willow, I just listened to your blogtalk radio interview (along with Scott Nicholson) by Stacey Cochran. I really enjoyed it.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

To me, it's the author who comes off poorly, and it's highly suspect that these posts coincide with the publication of his new book ripping into the publishing industry. If he was such a knowledgeable businessman, he should've realized the conflict of interest he was getting himself into from the start.

When Maass responds in the comments, the author replies to him like he's some sort of spurned lover, and even goes so far as to say he still respects him and thinks him and his wife are "good human beings." I certainly wouldn't say that about anyone I believed had stolen $10,000 from me. 

I'll be watching this story closely to see what develops, but to me this sounds like a naive writer who made some poor decisions and couldn't look past his delusions of grandeur enough to learn the industry and stop paying exorbitant amounts of ceaseless rounds of editing.


----------



## willowpolson (Nov 9, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Hey Willow, I just listened to your blogtalk radio interview (along with Scott Nicholson) by Stacey Cochran. I really enjoyed it.


=D Thank you!! =D I hope I didn't sound too flustered. It was fun!

Also, lots of good points from Nick! You'd have to be pretty... not swift... to get suckered for that kind of money.


----------



## kcmay (Jul 14, 2010)

Yeah, it doesn't paint him and his wife in a good light. There's a conflict of interest at the very least.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I don't want to sound too cynical, but the person who is writing this is selling a book about it.  

I tend to be cautious when someone is making money off things like this.

(Don't take me wrong, I'm not calling him a liar or anything... I'm just questioning his motivations.)

Vicki


----------



## John Hamilton (May 6, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> To me, it's the author who comes off poorly, and it's highly suspect that these posts coincide with the publication of his new book ripping into the publishing industry. If he was such a knowledgeable businessman, he should've realized the conflict of interest he was getting himself into from the start.


Yes, definitely. When one of my former Hollywood agents decided to take up film producing as well, I immediately pulled up stakes. He thought I was crazy, because he was going to "open up new doors" for me. But who would be representing my interests? It's a business, after all. Less than six months later, his agency/production shop was down the drain. Go figure.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

The only WOW in this thread is how quickly the majority of people here have taken what's been posted to someone's website as gospel truth.  

What the hell, people?  

You've got one guy saying someone else ripped him off.  That's all it takes for a guilty verdict?  Let's forget that Maas has been a respected member of the agenting community for more than two decades or that his company has a solid reputation.  Let's forget that he is the former head of the Association of Authors Representatives, the group that keeps an eye on the ethical practices in the industry itself.  Sure, a person like that can be just as guilty as someone we've never heard of.  Absolutely.

But what proof have you heard that he actually is?

None.

And yet many of you are ready to spread the word and tarnish someelse's name all because a writer most of us has never heard of posted something on his blog.

I don't know Maas from a hole in the wall, but what happened to basic common courtesy?


----------



## JJWestendarp (Nov 2, 2010)

Maass is a middling agent with an overvalued sense of self worth. He's part of the problem these days, hocking his Breakout Novel workshops as if that's the only way a book should be written.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

I think Surrey Writers has the right to know what's being posted about one of their presenters--it's up to them to check it out.

Suzanne


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Boy, now I am really glad he rejected me outright.

However, I was also a victim of the same scam. In 1997 or thereabouts, I submitted a manuscript to an agent whose name I got from an advertisement. I was in South Africa at the time setting up a private equity fund. The agent immediately wrote back to me and said that the story was great, but that it needed some work. He recommended a "book doctor" in New York, who would edit the manuscript and turn it into a marketable product.

When I contacted the "book doctor" they said that an edit would cost $1,500. Because this was the first agent to show this much enthusiasm for _Falling Star_ after so many rejections, I sent the book doctor the manuscript and a check for $1,500. After some time, the manuscript came back. Someone had obviously read it, because there were basic editing marks, misplaced commas, etc. There was no major suggestions as to re-work or restructuring. The overall comment was that it was a "great story". I sent the reworked manuscript to the agent and he promptly replied that there was a market for the book. I felt that I had been had.

Interestingly, I read this year that the "book doctor" was prosecuted for running a scam wherein they paid agents to send them marks like me for a cut of their book doctoring fee.

I am now very leery of anyone who wants to edit my book for a fee. If a real agent and publisher want to take the book on, they can shoulder the editing costs. I will not be suckered again. I live by the motto that you can scr*w me once and shame on you; but if you scr*w me twice, then shame on me.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2010)

SuzanneTyrpak said:


> I think Surrey Writers has the right to know what's being posted about one of their presenters--it's up to them to check it out.
> 
> Suzanne


Actually, it is up to YOU to verify your facts before engaging in libel or slander. This article stinks six ways to Sunday.


----------



## ◄ Jess ► (Apr 21, 2010)

This article made me feel very uncomfortable with the entire situation - even with the "facts" he presented, I don't feel like he's proved there's some big scam going on and I feel really awkward that everyone's assuming this agent and editor are trying to trick prospective authors out of their money. I also really really don't like the fact that this guy is marketing his book throughout the article. I can't say this really changes my opinion of anyone involved in the article, even the guy who wrote it. It sounds like he really thinks he's been scammed, but I'm not convinced.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Actually, it is up to YOU to verify your facts before engaging in libel or slander. This article stinks six ways to Sunday.


Excuse me? How am I involved in libel? If you read the earlier posts you'll see I actually have good things to say about Donald Maass. However, having attended the Surrey Conference a couple of times, and knowing it's run by a school district, I mentioned the blog to another key person involved with the conference. That person sent the link on.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> The only WOW in this thread is how quickly the majority of people here have taken what's been posted to someone's website as gospel truth.
> 
> What the hell, people?
> 
> ...


1. The agent himself replied in the comments section of part 3 of this blog. He didn't deny this happened, he admits that he and his wife had a long relationship with Daryl Sedore, and he claims his business relationship with his wife is ethical. It's not even close to ethical.

2. Dean Wesley Smith reported this on his blog. (I gave that link in the OP). Here's how Dean's post begins:



> Folks, an agent that I have alluded to, and that Laura has alluded to, but not mentioned names here, has been exposed by a writer taken by the editor-and-agent-working-together scheme. (See the link below.)
> 
> I used to consider this agent a friend until he started this scheme, then I shouted at him in public at a writer's conference, told him to his face what I thought of him, and haven't seen him since. I had hoped he had stopped this practice, but clearly he hasn't.
> 
> ...


So there are two established writers (Dean Wesley Smith and Laura) and Dean Wesley Smith states that he and Laura have been alluding to this agent for a while as behaving in some very questionable practices.

This is also not the first time I've heard about this, but I can't cite you any sources there.


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

What Joseph said. From what I've been able to ascertain, Mr. Maass is a respected literary agent, a member in good standing with AAR (Association of Authors' Representatives), and an agent with an impressive number of published clients. Additionally, a search of Lisa Rector-Maass reveals an exceptional _lack_ of criticism considering her field-paid editor-a field that garners a _lot_ of criticism and seems positively rife with scammers.

Looks to me as if the author may perchance be a victim of his own unrealistic expectations and is possibly looking for a scapegoat. At any rate, _sans_ additional complaints and with a mountain of contrary experiences, I would take this with a _huge_ grain of salt. Maybe even an ocean's worth of salt.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> But what proof have you heard that he actually is?


"Proof" has nothing to do with it. Two flaws in human thinking make stories like these stick. 1. People tend to believe the first version of a story they hear. 2. People are inclined to believe a story that fits with their perception of the world. People WANT to believe this is a true story because it justifies their worldview.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> "Proof" has nothing to do with it.


Hence my comments. Just because someone makes a post on the internet doesn't make it true and we shouldn't be acting as if it automatically does.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

R. Doug said:


> What Joseph said. From what I've been able to ascertain, Mr. Maass is a respected literary agent, a member in good standing with AAR (Association of Authors' Representatives), and an agent with an impressive number of published clients.


That's exactly the problem. Everyone is shocked to hear that he's been doing this and assumes that he isn't because of his reputation. But now we have someone detailing exactly the kind of scheme that the agent has been running for years, confirmed by Dean Wesley Smith and another pro writer, and the agent himself admits to this specifical relationship with Daryl Sedore and claims it was ethical.

Writers should not be paying the wife of a literary agent $10,000 or so dollars to help him fix his manuscript with the dangling carrot of representation hanging in front of his nose all that time. Agents should not be accepting payment of that nature from writers for editing, nor referring writers to his fiance or wife for the same service.

And what kept Daryl Sedore strung along that whole time is that encouragement by the agent and the indiciation that he might be represented by that agent. Nevermind that he was instructed to rewrite the book for an eon and the only person who made money over those years was the agent's fiance/wife.

Anyone want to make the argument that this is ethical?


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2010)

SuzanneTyrpak said:


> Excuse me? How am I involved in libel? If you read the earlier posts you'll see I actually have good things to say about Donald Maass. However, having attended the Surrey Conference a couple of times, and knowing it's run by a school district, I mentioned the blog to another key person involved with the conference. That person sent the link on.


You forwarded a libelous blog post written by an author peddling a book on the subject to a decision maker of a conference that hires the agent as a warning. What happens if this action leads to the agent being uninvited by the conference? Would you not accept that you might be doing financial harm to a person who has _never wronged you_ based on _accusations in a blog_?


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> Anyone want to make the argument that this is ethical?


Of course not. If it's true. That hasn't been ascertained. Right now, all we have is one person saying it is and another saying that's a misrepresentation of what happened.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> The agent himself replied in the comments section of part 3 of this blog. He didn't deny this happened,


Read it again, Moses. He's certainly saying that Daryl is misconstruing what happened and that he welcomes an ethics investigation from the group that monitors this very thing. I'd certainly call that a denial. He's just not getting into an internet shouting match.



> assumes that he isn't because of his reputation.


I'm not assuming anything of the sort. I'm saying its wrong for you to assume that its the truth without either first hand knowledge or more information that it is, indeed, true. All you have right now is heresy.

I've also been reading Dean for some time now. I saw his note and I'm aware of Laura's issues with the Maas agency in general because I've also known Laura for some time. So what? Writers complain about agents all the time and Dean has certainly not hidden his beefs with the publishing/agenting industries in general. How does the fact he said something change the situation?

Its also interesting that Dean demands no names be used in the comments of the post where he passes on Daryl's revelation. Why? His stance makes me think he's afraid of being sued, which is a real possibility here.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

The proper course of action is to either sue the agent/editor of misrepresentation, fraud etc. or go to the prosecutors in the appropriate jurisdiction and file a criminal complaint.  

In my case, although I felt that I had been had; I did not do anything.  However, the State of New York did prosecute the book doctor in question of running the kickback scheme that had targeted me in 1997.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You forwarded a libelous blog post written by an author peddling a book on the subject to a decision maker of a conference that hires the agent as a warning. What happens if this action leads to the agent being uninvited by the conference? Would you not accept that you might be doing financial harm to a person who has _never wronged you_ based on _accusations in a blog_?


In my opinion, and apparently in the opinion of the friend to whom I sent the link, the conference has a right to know what's being posted about their presenters. I imagine they won't take any action without further investigation.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> Of course not. If it's true. That hasn't been ascertained. Right now, all we have is one person saying it is and another saying that's a misrepresentation of what happened.


It's true.

We have an author who detailed exactly what happened. Another well-known author (Dean Wesley Smith) who has put his name on the line by stating that this agent has been running this scheme for years. Dean also suggested that another pro writer who participates on his blog has been alluding to the same agent for a while.

We also have the agent himself not denying that it happened in the very blog post where his name was given. He doesn't even say it was a misrepresentation of what happened. He admits that his wife offers editorial services and yet he still refers potential author-clients to her for her services while apparently showing interest in the writer's work.

That is unethical. Incredibly unethical, IMO.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Anyone want to make the argument that this is ethical?


Did the editor ever lie about her relationship with the agent? No, she made it clear from the beginning it was her husband. She never lied to the author. Also, at one point the editor tells the author the book is ready to be submitted, but it sounds like the author's personal life got in the way and he ended up deciding to rewrite it on his own. (Maybe I am misreading that section. There are a lot of holes in the narrative and some rambling sections that cloud the actual timeframe).

I don't even know if I believe that $10,000 number. Reading the blog, it sounded like there was a lot more going on and the author is padding the number. Maybe it's just me, but I don't know how much credibility I can give the author when he makes a specific point of complaining about all the gas he spent driving to New York City...in his Hummer...to meet with the agent. We're obviously dealing with a group of people who live in a different universe than the rest of us.

But the bottom line for me is this: instead of filing formal complaints with the appropriate agencies and entities, he chose to publicly attack this couple for no other reason than to plug his book. That speaks volumes to me. If this was a credible complain, he should have filed it with the appropriate boards and entities for investigation, who then would have reviewed all of the communications, contracts, etc and made a determination. But he hasn't done that. He hasn't actually presented evidence other than his rambling retelling of events as it suits him.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> It's true.


Moses, unless you've been privy to the conversations and representations of the two parties you can't possibly make that claim. I can get three people to say UFOs exist too, does that make them a reality? No, it means three people agree on their perception of something, not that anything they say happened even remotely did so.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> The only WOW in this thread is how quickly the majority of people here have taken what's been posted to someone's website as gospel truth.
> 
> What the hell, people?
> 
> ...


As one of the people who said "Wow" I'm going to go ahead clarify my position. I didn't have time earlier to go into a lengthy post, but I kind of feel it's necessary, now. I said:

"Wow. I don't know what to say."

Comment Part 1: Wow.
Expanded: Wow. What a drama storm.

Comment Part 2: I don't know what to think.
Expanded: I don't know any of the people involved in this story, nor are any facts presented. So far, we have one side of the story - and might I remind you, there are always three sides to every story.

That said, I fully realize that your post may have been more generic, but still, I resent the implication that I might be trying to contribute to some sort of tar and feathering.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

Arkali - it was generic.  I wasn't intentionally singling you out.


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> It's true.
> 
> We have an author who detailed exactly what happened. Another well-known author (Dean Wesley Smith) who has put his name on the line by stating that this agent has been running this scheme for years. Dean also suggested that another pro writer who participates on his blog has been alluding to the same agent for a while.


Oh, well then, obviously it's true because we have TWO people, perhaps even THREE (maybe, could be, possibly), coming out against this guy.

I think I'll wait a while longer and for more people to step forward before condemning the guy. Somehow, two (possibly three) people versus probably the many thousands who've dealt with this agent seems just a tad premature to me.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> Moses, unless you've been privy to the conversations and representations of the two parties you can't possibly make that claim. I can get three people to say UFOs exist too, does that make them a reality? No, it means three people agree on their perception of something, not that anything they say happened even remotely did so.


Again, the agent himself commented on Sedore's blog, didn't deny anything Sedore said, and admits that he "encouraged" the aspiring author while the author paid his wife for her services as an independent editor.

The agent even said he and his wife "work to follow best practices (not reflected in your posts) to keep a firewall between our businesses," but then admits in the same sentence that he and his wife "try to be friendly and encouraging to each others' clients when we meet them."

It doesn't sound like there's much of a firewall there. Sedore responded in part to the agent in the comments on the blog:



> ...
> 
> The deal, as I felt it was presented to me, was a literary agent who felt my book was "gripping" and felt it would garner publisher interest. So I continued to invest.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> Moses, unless you've been privy to the conversations and representations of the two parties you can't possibly make that claim. I can get three people to say UFOs exist too, does that make them a reality? No, it means three people agree on their perception of something, not that anything they say happened even remotely did so.


I couldn't agree with you more. Here's what we know as true: this author had some relationship with Maass and his wife, and paid a large sum of money for editing. He is unhappy with how that turned out. That's all.

Everything else is heresay, and is being told through the author's perception of it. I haven't seen screenshots of emails saying that this author would be "sold on every bookshelf in America" or heard about any contracts or agreements that were signed. It's all "they made me feel X way" or "they told me this, I remember for sure!"

The whole things reeks of a guy who feels slighted that he didn't get the big day in the sun that he'd always dreamed of, and is now giving everyone the who caused him that discomfort the finger.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> Arkali - it was generic. I wasn't intentionally singling you out.


I figured  But I really did want to say more about the subject and just didn't have time earlier.

Further thoughts:
I thought Mr. Maass' response was very professional.
I thought the author's response to Mr. Maass was a bit... weird. I would almost suspect a fighting couple. I'm not saying that to be catty, just that there are similarities in behavior. That said, the author probably does share some of the same emotions experienced by people going through a nasty break-up.

Personally, if he feels that strongly about it, I'd suggest small claims court. I doubt that he'd be able to get all of his money back and indeed, he should not, as he freely admits that he received service for his money. His other option is to file a complaint with the governing body, which Mr. Maass kindly offered to give him contact info for.

That said, I agree with Julie that posting this blog series (and "helpfully" mentioning in each) right before he publishes a book on the subject is... distasteful. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Mr. Maass is the one who brings a law suit.


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> It doesn't sound like there's much of a firewall there. Sedore responded in part to the agent in the comments on the blog:


It also doesn't sound like the author actually has proof of anything:



> I once asked you, I think it was in 2006, if you are my agent. Is this an understanding we have? If not, when would this happen? I remember you saying we would discuss that when I'm done the edits with Lisa. I didn't add that in the post as it is memory based only. But I know, I asked.


Is the author stupid? This amazingly savvy expert on all things scammish (he's peddling a book on the topic, after all) didn't know that since he had no contract the man was not his agent? And if the agent told him no, I'm not your agent, but we can discuss that AFTER you complete your business with my wife, that sounds like a big fat YES he did have a firewall. He didn't want to launch a business relationship with the author until he completed his business dealings with his wife.

The author is basing the entire story on his memories of conversations that happened five years ago.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Is the author stupid? This amazingly savvy expert on all things scammish (he's peddling a book on the topic, after all)


The irony is too much for me to bear.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Gah.... grammar nazi alert 

Hearsay.  Unverified - you have only HEARd what you are SAYing, but have not verified it.

Carry on


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

R. Doug said:


> Oh, well then, obviously it's true because we have TWO people, perhaps even THREE (maybe, could be, possibly), coming out against this guy.
> 
> I think I'll wait a while longer and for more people to step forward before condemning the guy. Somehow, two (possibly three) people versus probably the many thousands who've dealt with this agent seems just a tad premature to me.


One of the key people here is the agent himself admitting to the relationships between the author, his wife the freelance editor, and himself as as the author's potential literary agent.

It's not an ethical set-up when the encouragement of that agent motivated the author to continue spending thousands of his dollars with his wife acting as his editor over the course of six years. This, for a book that Sedore was told was never good enough to submit even when the editor wasn't even reading the revised version and still suggesting he needed to pay her more money for more editorial help.

The author signed up for all of this, but aspiring authors get taken advantage of all the time.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> the encouragement of that agent motivated the author to continue spending thousands of his dollars with his wife acting as his editor


You are reading into it. Maas does not admit to doing anything of the sort. He admits to encouraging the writer. For all we know, that equates to "Keep writing. You'll be published some day I'm sure." We have absolutely nothing before us, other than the writer's remarks, that Maas suggested he continue spending money with his wife, the freelance editor, so eventually Maas could represent him.

The only facts Maas admits to - there was a relationship between the three people involved. Maas doesn't even mention that money changed hands (though he implies it with his comments about an AAR investigation.)

There is no way I would respond to the author on a public website if I were Maas - it would just be dumb to get into it. So his lack of denials isn't defacto evidence, its simply using his head and thinking before vomiting all over the internet.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> One of the key people here is the agent himself admitting to the relationships between the author, his wife the freelance editor, and himself as as the author's potential literary agent.


Yes, this is fact.



MosesSiregarIII said:


> It's not an ethical set-up when the encouragement of that agent motivated the author to continue spending thousands of his dollars with his wife acting as his editor over the course of six years. This, for a book that Sedore was told was never good enough to submit even when the editor wasn't even reading the revised version and still suggesting he needed to pay her more money for more editorial help.


This is opinion. We only know the ethics of the setup from the author's decidedly biased point of view. From reading the article, it seems that the editor is more at fault than the agent, but he's the one we're discussing because he's a big name in the industry. Once again, we have not heard the other side of the story. Just because the agent doesn't want to get into a shouting match over the Internet on a spurned non-client's blog doesn't mean that he's guilty.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> Just because the agent doesn't want to get into a shouting match over the Internet on a spurned non-client's blog doesn't mean that he's guilty.


No, it means he's smart. Internet shouting matches aren't good business. Well, maybe if you're trying to sell books, but I don't even know that I'd agree with that


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> You are reading into it. Maas does not admit to doing anything of the sort. He admits to encouraging the writer. *For all we know, that equates to "Keep writing. You'll be published some day I'm sure." *We have absolutely nothing before us, other than the writer's remarks, that Maas suggested he continue spending money with his wife, the freelance editor, so eventually Maas could represent him.


Sedore quotes verbatim the email that the agent sent to him in 2005 that goes much farther than that. The email from the agent says:

_"As I think Gwen mentioned, I could not help reading over her shoulder the first 20 pages or so of PREMONITIONS, which are gripping. If you're willing, I'd love to be in line to read the manuscript once you are through the development and editing process. I hear nothing but good things from Gwen about your professionalism. With an opening this good, too, there's no doubt that this is a manuscript I'll want to read."_

It sounds like the agent's "encouragement" was very significant, unless Sedore literally made up the text of that email and the agent chose not to deny the text of that email after he'd read Sedore's blog. It wouldn't require a shouting match to do that.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

> If you're willing, I'd love to be in line to read the manuscript once you are through the development and editing process.


In other words - "The opening is good. You still need a lot of work though" - hence the development and editing process - "but I'd like to take a look when you reach that point."

That not "significant" in my eyes at all, never mind "very significant". It isn't saying "I'll represent you," it's saying "I'll consider it." Hell, every agent out there taking submissions is saying "I'll consider it" by the simple fact that they are willing to take a look.

Maas statement is the equivalent of saying "hey, liked the sample chapters, send me the manuscript when it is done." I don't consider that even an implied offer of representation, never mind that the writer makes it clear that Maas isn't offering representation by quoting their later conversation.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> We only know the ethics of the setup from the author's decidedly biased point of view. From reading the article, it seems that the editor is more at fault than the agent, but he's the one we're discussing because he's a big name in the industry. Once again, we have not heard the other side of the story. Just because the agent doesn't want to get into a shouting match over the Internet on a spurned non-client's blog doesn't mean that he's guilty.


It sounds to me like the editor and agent are both very much at fault. The editor even mentions in one of her emails to Sedore that she knows it's unethical for her to mention how much her partner the agent is interested in the work, then does it anyway. And then the agent emailed Sedore four hours later to express his interest.

If it's unethical--and according to the email below the editor even admitted that it was unethical--then it's simply unethical and they shouldn't do it. It's like saying, "Hey I know it's unethical to cheat on my wife, but this woman is incredibly hot so I'll do it just this one time." You don't get an exemption when it comes to right and wrong. Wrong isn't right on the third Tuesday of the month. Unethical is unethical.

Here's the editor's email, quoted verbatim by Sedore and not denied in any way by the agent:

_"I wanted to inform you of some good news. As you may already know, my fiancé is well known literary agent Mark. Yesterday, I spent part of the afternoon excitedly editing your manuscript. Mark, immersed in his own work, peered over my shoulder and asked to take a look. *Now, I must tell you that ethically, this is something we almost never do. We do not normally make a habit of sharing client's work, for the simple reason that he is an agent and I an editor - two very separate, though related, professions.*_ [my note: we don't know if she rarely does this or not--we only know that she does seem to have done it here]_ I have, however, spoken of your premise and the potential exhibited in your work on several occasions. I really think you have a chance of success in this business. Mark is one of several agents I'd recommend you submit Premonitions to when completed (based on a match of genre, style, etc), so I allowed him to read the first 20 pages. He too is excited about the story and, with your permission, would like to contact you with regard to Premonitions."_

Then four hours later, the agent emails Sedore this:

_"As I think Gwen mentioned, I could not help reading over her shoulder the first 20 pages or so of PREMONITIONS, which are gripping. If you're willing, I'd love to be in line to read the manuscript once you are through the development and editing process. I hear nothing but good things from Gwen about your professionalism. With an opening this good, too, there's no doubt that this is a manuscript I'll want to read."_

That is simply not ethical. Ethical would be stating up-front that the agent does not represent his wife's editorial clients. This is the opposite of that. That is not only _not_ having that so-called firewall in place, it's wedding the editor's influence and the agent's influence together (literally in this case--they are actually married).


----------



## LB Gschwandtner (Jun 21, 2010)

Maybe the agent -- Maass -- is repping THIS book and the ripoff accusations and controversy & blog posts are nothing more than pre press promo for said "expose."

I'm just sayin'...


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Did the editor ever lie about her relationship with the agent? No, she made it clear from the beginning it was her husband. She never lied to the author.
> ...
> 
> But the bottom line for me is this: instead of filing formal complaints with the appropriate agencies and entities, he chose to publicly attack this couple for no other reason than to plug his book. That speaks volumes to me. If this was a credible complain, he should have filed it with the appropriate boards and entities for investigation, who then would have reviewed all of the communications, contracts, etc and made a determination. But he hasn't done that. He hasn't actually presented evidence other than his rambling retelling of events as it suits him.


*"Did the editor ever lie about her relationship with the agent? No, she made it clear from the beginning it was her husband. She never lied to the author."*

That's the problem. An aspiring writer who wants to land a big agent might do things to try to impress or appeal to that agent, such as spend around $10,000 on his fiance's editorial services. There is a conflict of interests. The agent has a financial incentive to "encourage the writer," because his wife makes money from doing what he encouraged the author to do: that is to finish working with her on editorial matters.

The editor herself admits that this is unethical behavior in the email she sent to Sedore.

I agree somewhat with your bottom line, though. The author should file a complaint with the AAR and so on. However, anytime there's unethical behavior by agents, editors, publishers, etc. authors LOVE to hear about it on Preditors & Editors, AbsoluteWrite's "Bewares, Recommendations & Background Check," etc. because we like it when other writers try to prevent us from getting ripped off.

Authors get taken advantage of constantly in this business and there's a lot of pressure for authors to not speak up. They don't want to anger anyone or look unprofessional, so the vast majority of the horror stories in publishing get swept under the rug and we never hear about them. I'm friends with people who have privately told me so many horrible things about people who have wonderful reputations in this industry.

Why do we not hear about more of those stories? For one, who are people going to believe? The guy with the great reputation or the nobody writer? The nobody writer or the agent you might want to make an alliance with some day? Regardless of who is guilty in Sedore's situation, this thread is a perfect example of that. The victim doesn't get much credit because people rarely speak out about this sort of thing because they don't want to hurt their chances with other agents, publishers, etc. But writers have to look out for each other, don't they?


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

I'm still not seeing how that equates to the pair bilking the writer out of thousands of dollars.  There is an offer to take a look at the project, not one of representation.  In fact, the agent clearly states that he is not repping the author when he is asked outright.  For all we know, the author's work needed $10,000 worth of editing. 

You still have a he said, she said situation.  For all we know there were other emails or telephone calls that further explain, deny, or prove the situation one way or another.  They are not available here.

Assuming we have the entire story and stating the man is guilty of fraud - which is what the author is accusing him of - is a rather large stretch given what we have in front of us.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

The writer isn't getting much credit because rather than deal with the situation in a professional manner he chose to blast it all over the internet where it could help him sell his book.

His actions are as despicable as those he's accusing the agent/editor of.  Do you honestly think he's acting ethically?


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

What struck me about these blog posts is that the author was apparently satisfied with the editing services he received, admitting that the edits he paid for made his work stronger (at least initially). So I'm trying to decide where the "scam" comes in. The editor suggested that when the manuscript was ready for submission, her husband the agent was "one of" a few agents she would recommend submitting to. And the agent's words of encouragement (the ones quoted directly) seemed vague enough and carried no explicit promise of representation. I absolutely did _not_ see, anywhere in the whole story, any reference to the agent indicating that he wouldn't be interested in representing the author (once editing was done) unless that editing was performed by his wife.

I'm also disturbed by how quickly people jump on one person's version of events without taking the time to ask themselves whether there may be more to the story. Perhaps everything this author wrote was true. But just because someone says something (even if they believe it with everything inside them), and just because a couple other people back them up, doesn't mean it's true. It seems to me that the author felt the editor in question was providing a service of great value--at least until the end, when his personal life fell apart and progress on the novel stalled. If she hadn't spent time and effort editing his work, and he hadn't accepted her efforts as reasonable and beneficial, the author could have terminated their business relationship at any time. I see no indication that the agent in question threatened that he would refuse to represent a completed manuscript if the author was no longer being edited by his wife. To me, that would be unethical.

This feels like a very one-sided retelling to me. As a general rule, I like to withhold judgement in situations like this, where it's one person's word against another.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

Moses is correct that both the editor and agent seem to know from the start that having both of them involved isn't ethical, and as much is stated in the email. However, to me that makes the agent and editor _more_ credible, because she mentions this up front. In essence, she's saying she realizes it's a weird situation, and gives the author every chance at that point to put the brakes on the entire situation. By going forward from there, he's complying in a situation that he's already been told is sort of unethical.

People bend the rules every day in their jobs, doing things that aren't exactly by the book. That doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't mean these two should be tarred and feathered without a chance to defend themselves. And it certainly doesn't immediately make a four-year relationship a "scam."


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Jnassise said:


> I'm still not seeing how that equates to the pair bilking the writer out of thousands of dollars. There is an offer to take a look at the project, not one of representation. In fact, the agent clearly states that he is not repping the author when he is asked outright. For all we know, the author's work needed $10,000 worth of editing.
> 
> You still have a he said, she said situation. For all we know there were other emails or telephone calls that further explain, deny, or prove the situation one way or another. They are not available here.
> 
> Assuming we have the entire story and stating the man is guilty of fraud - which is what the author is accusing him of - is a rather large stretch given what we have in front of us.


I have to disagree, Joe. It's not a "he said, she said" situation because the agent didn't disagree with what Sedore said. It's not a case of widely varying reports. Sedore reported it, an established writer (Dean Wesley Smith) backed his report and said the agent has been doing this for years (Dean also cited another pro writer), and then the agent confirmed the kind of relationship he and his wife had with Sedore. There's not much disagreeing going on here, not at this point.

And Sedore never used the word fraud.

As for why it's inappropriate, it's a clear financial conflict of interests. The editor/wife admits it's unethical in her email to Sedore. She states exactly why it's unethical and she's right.

It's unethical for an agent to recommend particular freelance editors if that agent stands to benefit financially from that recommendation. It is a large conflict of interest and it reeks of pay to play. For example, the agent might decide that rather than trying to sell the author's works, he'll recommend the author to his freelance editor friends and just make money from the author that way. In this case it's not just a friend--it's his wife.

The agent should have a firm policy that he does not work with clients that hire his wife for editing. There actually should be a firm firewall between their businesses, as he admits but apparently doesn't follow through on.

He especially IMO should not be "peering over his wife's shoulder" at a rough manuscript that hadn't been submitted to his literary agency yet and then, on top of that, encouraging the writer to continue paying his wife for her editorial services with a strongly worded "encouragement." If things were going to get to that point, he should've _committed _to representing the author (not just said, "maybe later") and then told the author that he would offer editorial suggestions for free (like agents generally do) or that the writer needs to hire a freelance editor that he doesn't sleep with.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

JJWestendarp said:


> Maass is a middling agent with an overvalued sense of self worth. He's part of the problem these days, hocking his Breakout Novel workshops as if that's the only way a book should be written.


This is actually the real point that I think other pros (like Dean) really have objected to.

The fact is that there are a LOT of gurus and book doctors, famous ones who are adored, who are really just keeping the adulation (and book and conference income) going. They aren't intentionally scamming, but they aren't behaving ethically when they give advice that intentionally trades on the dreams of writers. Some of them are harmless, some are less so.

I don't particularly believe the blogger's story (that's for the courts to decide, perhaps), and I do wish he had not named the agent, so that the story could at least be a warning about the behavior rather than about the people.

Yog's Law: Money flows _toward_ the writer.

Even in this world of indie publishing, where we become publishers and pay for services, you really do need to keep Yog's Law in mind. If a professional really thinks that much of your writing, they will invest in it. If they won't even invest the time to read it.... then don't pin your hopes on some editing doing the job to fix it.

Camille


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> I have to disagree, Joe. It's not a "he said, she said" situation because the agent didn't disagree with what Sedore said. It's not a case of widely varying reports. Sedore reported it, an established writer (Dean Wesley Smith) backed his report and said the agent has been doing this for years (Dean also cited another pro writer), and then the agent confirmed the kind of relationship he and his wife had with Sedore. There's not much disagreeing going on here, not at this point.


The agent also didn't _agree_ with what Sedore said. He posted a very general "I'm very sorry that you see the situation this way" comment, which seemed to clearly indicate that he disagrees with Sedore's assessment of their relationship as being somehow fradulent, without actually getting into a back-and-forth over the Internet. Which is smart.



MosesSiregarIII said:


> As for why it's inappropriate, it's a clear financial conflict of interests. The editor/wife admits it's unethical in her email to Sedore. She states exactly why it's unethical and she's right.
> 
> It's unethical for an agent to recommend particular freelance editors if that agent stands to benefit financially from that recommendation. It is a large conflict of interest and it reeks of pay to play. For example, the agent might decide that rather than trying to sell the author's works, he'll recommend the author to his freelance editor friends and just make money from the author that way. In this case it's not just a friend--it's his wife.


Okay, but that's not what happened. You're acting as though Sedore contacted the agent, who then said "I will be willing to represent your work as long as you do some editing, and by the way, let me introduce you to my future wife, the editor". No, that's not what happened. That's not even what Sedore claims happened.

His initial relationship was with the editor, who at that time was dating the agent (they were not yet married). Sedore was introduced to the agent (as the editor's boyfriend) after establishing a friendly/busness relationship with the editor. So the agent did *not* recommend a freelance editor who also happened to be his wife. That just plain didn't happen. Read Part 1 again.

Should the agent and editor (now that they are husband and wife) keep their clients entirely separated for ethical reasons? Quite possibly, yes. Are they intentionally running a scam by not doing so? I'm not convinced. Sedore is an adult, right? These people were honest and upfront about everything, made no false promises, and even acknowledged the shaky ethics of both being involved with him. And yet he pressed on. He admits that the editing work that was performed improved his book. He asked the agent if he was his client, and was told no--that a discussion like that couldn't and wouldn't happen until his book was ready for submission. That seems reasonable to me. Why Sedore felt that the agent promised him anything when admitting clearly that nothing binding was ever signed or written is beyond me.

I agree with Julie upthread--seems to me that people who hold a certain worldview or nuture prejudices against people in a particular industry or profession desperately want to believe this is true without acknowledging the holes in Sedore's story, or the responsibility that he himself should bear as a functional adult. He expected something nobody ever explicitly promised him, then got bent out of shape when his dreams of being rich and famous weren't fulfilled. Then he wrote a book about it, and is engaging in libel to sell that book. I'm just not sure why I should believe the guy, when he sounds no more ethical than the people he's trashing.


----------



## KevinMcLaughlin (Nov 11, 2010)

Not taking sides here, but I thought it might be worth pointing out that Dean has posted additional information on this now, in response to Maass commenting on Dean's blog.

Sheds some more light and makes some more strenuous accusations, this time not just from one relatively unknown writer.

http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=2339


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> You're acting as though Sedore contacted the agent, who then said "I will be willing to represent your work as long as you do some editing, and by the way, let me introduce you to my future wife, the editor". No, that's not what happened. That's not even what Sedore claims happened.
> 
> His initial relationship was with the editor, who at that time was dating the agent (they were not yet married). Sedore was introduced to the agent (as the editor's boyfriend) after establishing a friendly/busness relationship with the editor. So the agent did *not* recommend a freelance editor who also happened to be his wife. That just plain didn't happen. Read Part 1 again.
> 
> ...


I think I confused you here; sorry about that. I made a more general point that it's unethical for agents to benefit financially from arrangements with freelance editors. Sedore met and began working with the editor first, and if I seemed to suggest otherwise then that's my mistake because I was aware of that after reading Sedore's blog. My second paragraph that you quoted was intended as a general statement.

That info on Dean Wesley Smith's blog that KevinMC just posted has Dean stating that this agent did in fact recommend aspiring authors to his fiance or wife for editorial services, though. Here's the quote from Dean: "I personally know of three people that you told to go to your wife for editing services at that one conference. Again, disgusted at an old friend doing this is beyond what I felt."

In Sedore's case, I think it is clear that the agent at least gave strong encouragement for the writer to finish working with this editor, and the end of saga showed that the editor hadn't read his latest version and still wanted him to pay her more money to do more editing. So there is a problem here. That encouragement from the agent is very close to a recommendation if it isn't an outright recommendation. The agent reportedly wrote in that email: "I'd love to be in line to read the manuscript once you are through the development and editing process [with my wife: my addition] ... With an opening this good, too, there's no doubt that this is a manuscript I'll want to read."

I agree that the writer is largely responsible for his own actions, but that doesn't mean the actions of the other parties should be excused. Sometimes people get manipulated by salesmen and in those cases the blame goes both ways. Aspiring writers in particular get taken advantage of a lot and unfortunately someone with a good name and reputation as an agent is in a better position to influence such a writer who desperately wants to be published.

I also agree that Sedore sharing the information while he has a book coming out on this subject calls his credibility into question, but even if there are issues with how Sedore is presenting this information, and I think there are some (though I don't see any reason to believe Sedore has lied about anything yet), it doesn't change facts about how the other parties acted. The way the agent and editor teamed up and sold him on continuing to work with the editor was manipulative, IMO, and the editor herself mentioned that it was unethical behavior in an email.

The bigger point for me is about aspiring authors getting manipulated into spending lots of money on the hope of getting represented by an agent. Like Camille mentioned, this should be a warning about that behavior by writers and agents (and others). Maybe that's something we can agree on.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Comment from Sedore on his blog:



> Everyone,
> 
> I have decided to remove the names of the agent and editor. I know that people will be concerned that I have caved.
> 
> ...


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Hard to stuff that genie back into the bottle.


----------



## Jnassise (Mar 22, 2010)

Now I'm really disgusted.


----------



## InvisiBill (Nov 11, 2010)

I'm posting anonymously because I'm an ex-friend of Daryl's, and I don't want the kind of retribution he's willing and capable of dishing out. Here's a bit of background to balance out the other side of the argument:

Up until recently, Daryl had nothing but praise for Lisa Rector-Maass. He felt like his money had been well spent, and he was very proud of the final version of Paranormal Precognitions. You can see an example of his opinion in the comments on Writer Unboxed: http://writerunboxed.com/2010/03/19/should-you-hire-a-professional-editor/

"I hired Donald Maass' wife, Lisa Rector-Maass to edit my manuscript. She did an amazing job. My experience with Lisa taught me ways to increase pace, write with vigor and to edit myself. Hiring Lisa was more like having a private writing coach. I felt like i left that experience with a new knowledge of writing and publishing. I encourage it for the same reasons Christina Katz gave and for a newbie writer."

What he is encouraging here is to hire an independent editor.

He says that when he asked Lisa to stop editing his manuscript, they dropped him like a hot potato. However, what really happened was he told Lisa he didn't want her services any longer, and she said okay. Then he expected Donald to contact him, but of course Donald never did. It isn't the responsibility of the agent to contact the writer for submissions. Daryl never submitted his manuscript to the Maass agency because he felt slighted that Donald didn't ask personally. Instead, he racked up a number of rejections for Paranormal Precognitions, and he started to get angry and frustrated. You are welcome to judge the quality of his novel yourself. The first several chapters are available for preview. It isn't hard to see why he kept getting rejections. Note that Lisa never edited this version of the novel. Daryl rewrote it from scratch after his final consultation with Lisa.

So, instead of admitting that he needs more work as a writer, Daryl started blaming Lisa and Don. He published his book himself and decided to start his own incredibly overpriced e-book publishing company: http://www.augustmoonph.com/services.html His reasoning was a) he'd lost his fortune during his divorce, and he needed a way to recoup his losses, b) his book was fantastic, but no one in publishing recognized it, so he was obviously more skilled than they were and should be making money off it, and c) he knew first-hand how desperate writers can be when trying to be published. (Moses, as a successful e-book publisher yourself, take a look at his prices and say honestly he isn't trying to rip people off.)

We split after he started attacking agents in an effort to promote his "expose." Check his blog, Facebook, and Twitter histories. Donald Maass isn't the first. I told Daryl I thought he was using shoddy business practices, and he threatened to make my life miserable if I opposed him. He warned me to be careful of who I was messing with, because he had been "playing the game" for years and knew how to get to people.

There's always another side to the story. Hope this helps balance opinions.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

If that rambling mess was supposed to be an excerpt of an about-to-be-published book, I think he might want to give Gwen the editor another call!


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

InvisiBill said:


> I'm posting anonymously because I'm an ex-friend of Daryl's, and I don't want the kind of retribution he's willing and capable of dishing out. Here's a bit of background to balance out the other side of the argument:
> 
> Up until recently, Daryl had nothing but praise for Lisa Rector-Maass. He felt like his money had been well spent, and he was very proud of the final version of Paranormal Precognitions. You can see an example of his opinion in the comments on Writer Unboxed: http://writerunboxed.com/2010/03/19/should-you-hire-a-professional-editor/
> 
> ...


Wow! This just gets better and better!

Kidding aside, I can't say I'm surprised. A lot of these issues are pretty easily picked out of his blog posts, namely that his version of the story is seen through a very unique perspective ... how own.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

$799 for manuscript formatting for Smashwords?   Our Jeff would be rich!


----------



## KevinMcLaughlin (Nov 11, 2010)

I dunno...  I think that irate post on Sedore's personal blog has more reliability than "Mr. Anonymous".  Really...  Can't give a name, then don't expect folks to take you seriously.

I would have taken the entire thing with a grain of salt (this IS the internet - how many random stories pop up a day?), but for Dean's posts on the subject.  I've been following him a while now, and he's opinionated - but right more often than not, and careful about his reputation.  I doubt he would say anything without being very sure of its veracity.  I find his comments more disturbing than Sedore's, I suppose, because I have a great deal more confidence in his words being true.

My gut reaction is someone contacted Sedore with a "drop the names or we sue" letter and he blinked.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

I thought one of the ten, no, three commandments of the bible of publishing a book was to never give money to an agent or an editor.  I guess they now have to expand that to 'wife of agent.'

Anyway, this post is a good dish on you know what.  Let me go get some popcorn and come back later.  This is getting riviting.


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

The fact that this guy is now running a website doing the exact same thing that happened to him (ripping off authors who don't know any better) is absolutely infuriating to me.

If you want an even bigger laugh, if you go to the contact page of that site, you'll see that he's the publisher, and guess who is listed as the editor? Brenda *Sedore* ... aka his wife, girlfriend, etc.

Sounds like he took their "scam" blueprint pretty literally!


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> The bigger point for me is about aspiring authors getting manipulated into spending lots of money on the hope of getting represented by an agent. Like Camille mentioned, this should be a warning about that behavior by writers and agents (and others). Maybe that's something we can agree on.


I'm glad the blogger removed the names, although it's a little late. However, back to the point ....

Yes, the problem is more than scammers who intentionally mislead young authors. Authors (even those who are old and experienced) are easy to mislead. We often get desperate, and cling to the most amazingly silly notions as long as they keep us going. In some sense, we NEED to delude ourselves to get through the process.

And any pro in the business knows this.

But it's very hard not to help a drowning person, so even the best of intentions can lead to bad results. When someone like Dean Wesley Smith himself, or Joe Konrath, reports on all of the possibilities of the writing life; we all know that the audience hears exactly what they want to hear and nothing else. "Yeah yeah, I know it's a long shot, but Konrath says he's not an exception and I'm better off doing this all myself and keeping the proceeds!"

That's why, when I see a pro acting snarky online, I don't see it as bad. I worry more about those people who are overly nice and encouraging (including myself). I'm not saying we shouldn't be helpful, or even effusive - but if people start following you for it, it can become a slippery slope. And when someone who is supposedly making their money from, say, agenting, is actually making more on public speaking, it's a slipperier slope.

But more importantly, we as writers have to help ourselves and each other by keeping in mind that we are easy to seduce. And the other party, good intentions or not, doesn't have to do much of anything to lead us down the garden path.

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> The fact that this guy is now running a website doing the exact same thing that happened to him (ripping off authors who don't know any better) is absolutely infuriating to me.
> 
> If you want an even bigger laugh, if you go to the contact page of that site, you'll see that he's the publisher, and guess who is listed as the editor? Brenda *Sedore* ... aka his wife, girlfriend, etc.
> 
> Sounds like he took their "scam" blueprint pretty literally!


I don't know if this is better or worse than what you said, but his wife is listed as the publisher and he's listed as the editor.

There's plenty to criticize here because I agree that he would be taking advantage of authors at some of these prices, but I will say that there's nothing wrong with him and his wife going into business together on this company (though it kind of funny ). That info is plain to see and that is not unethical per se. If he was a well-known literary agent and he was recommending his wife as an editor, that would be different.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> If that rambling mess was supposed to be an excerpt of an about-to-be-published book, I think he might want to give Gwen the editor another call!


It's also an example of Gwen the editor's work, remember.

I agree with Dean here - that it is unethical to lead people to believe that a good editor (and more and more editing) can fix crap. And anyone who keeps an author on as a client for ten years on the same book is definitely misleading the author. Either the book is crap and the editor is just leading on a poor delusional sap, or the book was good, and the editor is milking the work unnecessarily.

(I keep thinking about _Sunset Boulevard_, and figure that it should be required viewing fore anyone before they go into the Book Doctoring business.)

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> If that rambling mess was supposed to be an excerpt of an about-to-be-published book, I think he might want to give Gwen the editor another call!


Though it makes you wonder, if (let's just say) his writing is that bad, why did the agent and editor seem to promise him such big things? Did they have ten thousand reasons to do so?


----------



## Nick Fox (Oct 26, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Though it makes you wonder, if (let's just say) his writing is that bad, why did the agent and editor seem to promise him such big things? Did they have ten thousand reasons to do so?


Fair point.


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2010)

> The money involved in driving there, (15 hours one way in an H2 Hummer)


This is where I knew the author was not the sharpest tool in the shed.

As for the pair and their great reputation, you don't have to scam everybody you work with to be a scam artist. It really only takes one, doesn't it?


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Nick Fox said:


> I'll be watching this story closely to see what develops, but to me this sounds like a naive writer who made some poor decisions and couldn't look past his delusions of grandeur enough to learn the industry and stop paying exorbitant amounts of ceaseless rounds of editing.


I have to agree. A business person should know that you always get a second opinion and if an editor gives it two passes and can't get the manuscript into shape then you would probably benefit from a totally different editor. If nothing else it would be someone else's perspective on the story. I wouldn't even have told the first editor that I was taking it to a second, this would have exposed the scam, if it was in fact a scam or just non-editing, just like getting a new plumber would expose the errors of the previous one.

As for the conflict of interest, I would think that a business person would pick that up right away too... like have your home inspector be married to your realestate agent. I am not a business person and even I wouldn't think that was a good thing.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Monique said:



> Hard to stuff that genie back into the bottle.


No joke. Let's close the barn door, y'all! Never mind that the horse is halfway down the road already...

In all seriousness, do I think there was a breach of ethics? Yes, probably. Well - I wouldn't even go that far. Let me say that there is the appearance of impropriety. That said - there's a reason that married people generally do not (or should not) meet their single friend (of the opposite sex, alone) in the lobby of a hotel for a drink several times a week. To go so far as to accuse someone of perpetrating a scam? I would not, not based upon the "evidence" that has been presented so far. And truthfully, it's none of my business. Even if I were a writer looking to get published, it wouldn't be my business. Changing the names to Mark and Gwen and presenting the piece as a cautionary tale works just fine. Naming names, pointing fingers and such does not.

If you get caught in a sh**-storm, you come out stinking. And that applies regardless of who "started it".


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> But more importantly, we as writers have to help ourselves and each other by keeping in mind that we are easy to seduce. And the other party, good intentions or not, doesn't have to do much of anything to lead us down the garden path.


"Nobody can lie to you nearly as convincingly as you can lie to yourself." - My daddy


----------



## amanda_hocking (Apr 24, 2010)

I like how inflamed people get over these things. 

Here's what I took from the post:
-the author of the post didn't think things through
-the editor *might* have acted improperly 
-the agent had nothing to do with anything, except he happened to be there

The obvious truth is that you shouldn't spend more money than you're willing to lose.

But if I had to spend $10 grand on edits before I published anything, I'd never have published a thing. 

I don't know how much of anything I read I believe, but it does have a lesson to it - RESEARCH. Before you believe something, before you sign a check, before you click publish. Find out what you're doing before you agree to do it. Clarify terms. Ask questions. Do not make assumptions. And don't listen to gossip.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

amanda_hocking said:


> I don't know how much of anything I read I believe, but it does have a lesson to it - RESEARCH. Before you believe something, before you sign a check, before you click publish. Find out what you're doing before you agree to do it. Clarify terms. Ask questions. Do not make assumptions. And don't listen to gossip.


Amen.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

This is a good comment that demonstrates the proper ethical "firewall" that this agent and editor don't seem to have followed. I found it on the comments on part 3. The quote is from Lou Aronica, who runs both a freelance editing service and a publishing imprint:

"The Story Plant is an entity entirely separate from The Fiction Studio. Working with me on an editorial project would not be an avenue toward publication by The Story Plant. In fact, it would be the opposite of that, as I would not want any issues of conflict of interest to arise. Similarly, if you were to submit a manuscript for consideration by The Story Plant (submission details are on the website) and we did not find your manuscript appropriate for our list, I would not then suggest that we enter into an editorial arrangement with The Fiction Studio. I have tried very hard to keep profit motives out of any decision regarding my handling a project, and this is simply too much of a gray area."

Link


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

There is a lot in here - and a lot of emotions but I think everyone needs to try to put things into perspective.

1 - The author feels "scammed" but the reality is it looks like he made bad choices and a fool and his money are soon parted.

2 - The editor was "doing work" for the money received - you can argue the money was too much for too little but if all they wanted to do was rip someone off they could have done so with a lot less effort on their part. It looks to me they were genuinely interested in helping improve the work.

3 - There are multiple sides to every story and the truth usually lies somewhere in the middle. I think the author heard what he wanted to hear. Words of encouragement could be nefarious schemes to get more money or they could be genuine belief that the writer has potentital but needs a litle more help.  Only the one saying the words will know what there true motivation was.

4 - Yes money flows to authors - but if an author wants to invest in seeking help with editing etc there are legitimate reasons to do so. For a freelance-editor to receive money to perform a service is not unethical.

5 - If the original work was complete crap - and encouragement was given to bilk more money - sure that's wrong - but again only those who did the deed can know in their hearts which way they felt

6 - The "spurned author" is using this to make money on his book about being taken - that reaks a bit of kettle calling the pot black. 

7 - Donald Maas has a long standing track record, and I believe a genuine desire to help new authors. His response did not IMO indicate culpability but rather said -yes the three of us knew each other and were involved  - and I know what I did and did not do. He seems to be saying he welcomes the AAR to investigate and is confident that when his side is aired the picture will look much different than the one the author is painting.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

In this maelstrom over this one incident, please do not overlook my tiny contribution.  

From personal experience, I was scammed by an editing company that paid agents to funnel marks to them at $1,500 a throw.  This editing company no longer exists as it was sued successfully by the Attorney General in New York State.  The morale of the story is: if a literary agent tells you you have a great story, but it needs work and they know of a great editor; run like hell.  Do not fall into this trap.  I did once.

Phil


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> In this maelstrom over this one incident, please do not overlook my tiny contribution.
> 
> From personal experience, I was scammed by an editing company that paid agents to funnel marks to them at $1,500 a throw. This editing company no longer exists as it was sued successfully by the Attorney General in New York State. The morale of the story is: if a literary agent tells you you have a great story, but it needs work and they know of a great editor; run like hell. Do not fall into this trap. I did once.
> 
> Phil


Very valid point Phil - An agent saying "it needs more work" is fine - but they should not point you someone "who just happens to fit the bill".


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

To stake out a contrarian position here:

Things like this don't really outrage me that much. I've said many times that I don't necessarily agree with the holy "money always flows to the author" commandment, because a lot of what's wrong with the publishing industry arises from it. It also is striking to me that if the industry shifts to the self-publishing model in any significant way, there are going to be a lot of people sinking thousands of dollars into projects that fail, and that will just be part of life and authors will have to suck it up.

This guy invested time and money in a project that didn't pan out. It happens every day in every other field out there.

If _all_ agents monetized their time the way other professionals do, you'd actually be able to pick up the phone and speak to one.

Someone looking to self-publish lurking on these boards right now will read lots of posts advising him to hire a cover designer and an editor, and to take advantage of various advertising services. Some of the people reading that advice are going to be wasting their money, because their book won't sell. Are all of those people scam victims? Are we scamming them? I think we're just describing the process and letting them take their shot.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> Someone looking to self-publish lurking on these boards right now will read lots of posts advising him to hire a cover designer and an editor, and to take advantage of various advertising services. Some of the people reading that advice are going to be wasting their money, because their book won't sell. Are all of those people scam victims? Are we scamming them? I think we're just describing the process and letting them take their shot.


There is inherently something different about advertisements and posts offering services and a presumably trusted individual advising an author to get editing from a specific source. The former is free enterprise; the latter is a potential scam.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

> Again, the agent himself commented on Sedore's blog, didn't deny anything Sedore said, and admits that he "encouraged" the aspiring author while the author paid his wife for her services as an independent editor.
> 
> The agent even said he and his wife "work to follow best practices (not reflected in your posts) to keep a firewall between our businesses," but then admits in the same sentence that he and his wife "try to be friendly and encouraging to each others' clients when we meet them."


Moses, the exact sequence of events is what determines what is ethical or not.

If you submit to an agent, and they reject you, but say, "Well, you might be good enough after you buy this editing service..." I can see an ethical problem there.

But if you've never submitted to a particular agent, and they've never instructed you to use a particular editing service, if you start using a service because you think it gives you an "in" with an agent, the unethical person is...you.

It sounds to me like Sedore stuck with the editing process because he reasoned, "Hey, my editor is married to a big time agent! I can take advantage of nepotism if I just keep writing this woman checks!" If you set out to do that, you're assuming that you can twist a relationship to your advantage, and the ethics of that are very questionable.

If a gangster comes up to me and says, "Hey, youse gots to hire my nephew!" and I do it because I'm afraid, the gangster and the nephew are unethical. But if I am sitting around thinking how useful it would be to me to have the gangster as a friend, and I go out on my own and hire the nephew, expecting the gangster to do me all sorts of favors later in return, then the unethical person is...me.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> There is inherently something different about advertisements and posts offering services and a presumably trusted individual advising an author to get editing from a specific source. The former is free enterprise; the latter is a potential scam.


But Sedore never asserts that the agent did that.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

Here's how the story starts:


> Editors at the time were offering a "Blue Pencil" meeting where they would read a few pages and discuss, over ten to fifteen minutes, what was working and what wasn't in my manuscript.
> 
> I met with a freelance editor (Name Redacted) I'll call Gwen, who at the time hadn't married her literary agent boyfriend (Name Redacted) yet but they're married now.
> 
> Gwen told me my novel had the best premise she had heard all weekend. She said, with a little help, my novel would be ready to submit. Later, throughout the weekend, she introduced me to her boyfriend, the literary agent I'll call Mark, who also asked to see the material after Gwen and I were done with it as I had already decided to hire her to help me edit it.


Sedore was already working with the editor when this all started.

So just about everything that happens after this point is the result of the fact that he reasoned, "I can leapfrog from using this editor to getting this agent to represent me! They're engaged, of course he'll have to do what she says! Where's my checkbook?"

He was trying to daisy chain his business relationships. People do that in every other industry all the time. Sometimes you can leverage one contact to get another contact, and make a sale. But sometimes, you can't. And that doesn't make the first person in the chain a scammer. It just means that you tried to make a relationship-driven sale and you failed.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> Moses, the exact sequence of events is what determines what is ethical or not.
> 
> If you submit to an agent, and they reject you, but say, "Well, you might be good enough after you buy this editing service..." I can see an ethical problem there.
> 
> ...


I don't understand that syllogism and disagree with its conclusion. As long as the writer does not say to the editor, "if I use you will you force agent A to take my book", I do not see any unethical behavior. If, however, the editor says, "Use me and I can get you in with Agent A", then that editor has committed an ethical error. The first has no quid pro quod, the second has, whether direct or implied.


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2010)

Philip Chen said:


> If, however, the editor says, "Use me and I can get you in with Agent A", then that editor has committed an ethical error.


1. Nobody is arguing otherwise, however
2. At no time did the editor EVER say that. Even in the author's longwinded blog, those words never come out of her mouth. The author writes his version of events to imply that was her intent, but frankly nobody has seen any contract, e-mails, screenshots or any real evidence that shows this is what was said.

I have a very real rule in life. If you are not man/woman enough to file a formal complaint the right way, you automatically lose 80% of any credibility you have when you try to start a flame war online. If you feel you were wronged, there are a hundred legitimate channels to go through. And if you can't be bothered to get your affairs in order to present your evidence correctly so it can be judged by a nuetral third party, I frankly don't give any credibility to anything you post on your blog...particularly when you are selling a book on the subject.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> I don't understand that syllogism and disagree with its conclusion. As long as the writer does not say to the editor, "if I use you will you force agent A to take my book", I do not see any unethical behavior. If, however, the editor says, "Use me and I can get you in with Agent A", then that editor has committed an ethical error. The first has no quid pro quod, the second has, whether direct or implied.


If you want someone to do something for you, and your method of getting them to do it is to do business with a relative of theirs, you are assuming that nepotism exists and that you can exploit it.

If I hire the wife of my town's mayor, assuming that because I've done that the mayor will fix my parking tickets, that means that I'm assuming the mayor is unethical and I'm trying to _join_ him in being unethical.

"I bet writers who hire this guy's wife get favorable treatment and move to the head of the line. _Sign me up! I'm in!_"

Since everything here relies on implication, and there's never an explicit quid pro quo on either side, then we have to examine the writer's assumptions, too.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> 1. Nobody is arguing otherwise, however
> 2. At no time did the editor EVER say that. Even in the author's longwinded blog, those words never come out of her mouth. The author writes his version of events to imply that was her intent, but frankly nobody has seen any contract, e-mails, screenshots or any real evidence that shows this is what was said.
> 
> I have a very real rule in life. If you are not man/woman enough to file a formal complaint the right way, you automatically lose 80% of any credibility you have when you try to start a flame war online. If you feel you were wronged, there are a hundred legitimate channels to go through. And if you can't be bothered to get your affairs in order to present your evidence correctly so it can be judged by a nuetral third party, I frankly don't give any credibility to anything you post on your blog...particularly when you are selling a book on the subject.


Julie,

My comment was a hypothetical in answer to a comment made by another poster about how a writer is unethical if he or she approaches a book editor if he or she thinks that hiring that editor will get them an in with a particular agent. It was not directed to the discussion about Maas.

Phil


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Two things.

First, writers really shouldn't pay for anything, other than a few classes and how-to books and maybe a conference here and there.

Second, beware agents with something to sell.

I want my agent selling MY books, not selling her books and charging for her advice.

There are people who want to write, but can't. There is money to be made by encouraging these people, even though they will likely never succeed.

But there is no clear line between actively trying to help someone improve as a writer and stringing them along to believe they'll have a huge bestselling novel some day if they keep working hard. You're either all in or all out.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> If you want someone to do something for you, and your method of getting them to do it is to do business with a relative of theirs, you are assuming that nepotism exists and that you can exploit it.
> 
> If I hire the wife of my town's mayor, assuming that because I've done that the mayor will fix my parking tickets, that means that I'm assuming the mayor is unethical and I'm trying to _join_ him in being unethical.
> 
> ...


I guess where I disagree is the assumption that if a writer chooses the best editor in town but one who happens to be the spouse of the best agent in town that the writer has committed an ethical error. The only time I think that happens is if the writer directly or indirectly states to the editor that there is an expectation of a quid pro quod. Believe me, as a former investment banker we struggled all the time with this very issue albeit in a different industry.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Philip Chen said:


> I guess where I disagree is the assumption that *if a writer chooses the best editor in town but one who happens to be the spouse of the best agent in town that the writer has committed an ethical error*. The only time I think that happens is if the writer directly or indirectly states to the editor that there is an expectation of a quid pro quod. Believe me, as a former investment banker we struggled all the time with this very issue albeit in a different industry.


She didn't say that they have. She said that they have IF they intended to leverage the relationship in an unethical way. I think it's an interesting point. Regardless of whether or not _quid pro quo_ was implied or said outright, I do think that the author hoped that his relationship with one might lead to a contract with the other.

Anyway, as I said up-thread, it does look inappropriate. Steps should have been taken on the editor / agent's side to make sure everything was in the open and appropriate. Perhaps they thought they had. I don't know. The only thing I know is that unless and until the writer files some sort of a complaint and a ruling is made in his favor, I'll treat his blog post as a cautionary tale and not as gospel truth.

That said - anyone else think he's shot himself in the foot? If I were an agent, I wouldn't touch him with a ten-foot pole after this.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Arkali and others,

I hope that everyone understands that my comments have nothing to do with the Maas matter, but is based on a hypothetical relationship between an author and a propsective book editor. 

Phil


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Two things.
> 
> First, writers really shouldn't pay for anything, other than a few classes and how-to books and maybe a conference here and there.
> 
> ...


I agree with this.

Of course there are always two sides to a story, or more. Ultimately, as writers, we need to beware and be aware -- we can become vulnerable when faced with people who we believe have the power to help us attain our dreams.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> I guess where I disagree is the assumption that if a writer chooses the best editor in town but one who happens to be the spouse of the best agent in town that the writer has committed an ethical error. The only time I think that happens is if the writer directly or indirectly states to the editor that there is an expectation of a quid pro quod. Believe me, as a former investment banker we struggled all the time with this very issue albeit in a different industry.


And naturally, I'd want to stress that none of this discussion applies to what happened to you. If someone directs you to use a service and does not disclose that they are getting a kickback from the service provider, that's definitely unethical and in many cases illegal to boot.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Philip Chen said:


> Arkali and others,
> 
> I hope that everyone understands that my comments have nothing to do with the Maas matter, but is based on a hypothetical relationship between an author and a propsective book editor.
> 
> Phil


What TBrookside said. And honestly, this whole discussion is hypothetical because none of us has access to the facts of the case


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Here's another blogger on this story.

Quote from the blog: "Do I know this story to be true or false? No. Do I know the people he is discussing? One of them since my second-ever conference 15 years ago. Have I heard a number of stories like this about them? None so blatant, but I regret to say, yes."

So add another to the those who are reporting that this, as Dean Wesley Smith called it, "editor-and-agent-working-together scheme" has been used by this agent and editor before.

In the blog, he goes on to wonder why a successful agent such as this one would use practices like this.


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Two things.
> 
> First, *writers really shouldn't pay for anything*, other than a few classes and how-to books and maybe a conference here and there.
> 
> ...


Hey Mr. Kilborn / Konrath,

Just curious about something. Are you saying that I shouldn't hire an editor to take a look at my current WIP? I'm less worried about grammar, punctuation and style. Good or bad, my writing is what it is.

I'm more worried about plot holes. It's a complicated plot involving who did and didn't know certain things at certain times and who knows of the existence of certain people and who doesn't. I'm afraid I missed something and I want to be sure.

Maybe beta readers would be a better way to go? Just wondering...

Thanks

...dave


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> Here's how the story starts:
> Sedore was already working with the editor when this all started.
> 
> So just about everything that happens after this point is the result of the fact that he reasoned, "I can leapfrog from using this editor to getting this agent to represent me! They're engaged, of course he'll have to do what she says! Where's my checkbook?"
> ...


I agree that Sedore starting with the agent first makes this situation a bit better at first glance (although Dean Wesley Smith and others have reported that this agent/editor have also done it the other way around--with the agent recommending the editor first), but not by much IMO.

Because the month after Sedore met the editor, the editor sent him this email:

"I've spoken with Joan [supposedly an acquisitions editor] and, overall, her report was quite good. She loved the premise and feels there is potential for it to become a Koontz like novel. She suggested you focus on building your characters and filling in the story with more dramatic tension. I agree. At this point she is primarily interested in seeing your voice and style develop further. She suggested taking the time to going through another three or four rounds of revision (three or four rounds of revision - man, what a hook for locking me in [that's Sedore's parenthetical comment]) to really polish the story before sending it out and to get to know yourself better as a writer. Although this can be a time consuming process, I have to agree that it is to your advantage to follow such advice.

*I spoke briefly with Mark, my better half and a top NY agent. He too expressed interest in seeing the completed, polished novel *a year or so down the road (roughly the amount of time required for it to transcend the early draft stages). So all in all, good news abounds!"

So right there the editor used the agent's name to keep the client interested. And, the agent is even at this point engaging in questionable behavior by not having a firewall in place between his business and his fiance's. A more ethical email would not have used the big-name agent as a dangling carrot in front of the aspiring writer, and it would've actually suggested up front that working with her as an editor makes Sedore ineligible to be represented by her fiance's literary agency.

Then there are the emails in part 2 of his story where the agent himself sends a very encouraging letter to the writer after "peering" over his wife's shoulder at a manuscript that the author had not formally submitted to his literary agency. This after the editor four hours earlier said that it was unethical for her to be sharing his material with her husband, the famous literary agent.

So just saying that the writer contacted the editor first isn't a get-out-of-ethical-behavior-free card. What Dean Wesley Smith called the "editor-and-agent-working-together scheme" was still employed after the writer hired the agent.

Sedore's comments in part 3 to the agent also indicated that they had had dinner together in New York, during which they "had respect," and rode in a limo together after dinner (for the record: limo ride paid for by Sedore). That's not much of a firewall, if you ask me.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Honestly, this whole thing reminds me of a romantic relationship gone bad.  Not trying to be flip, but there you have it.

Guy likes girl.  Guy buys girl fancy dinners and takes her to nice places.  Girl isn't really interested, but she's okay with going out with the guy because a) she doesn't have other plans and b) Steak dinners are nice.  Guy buys girl expensive gifts and if she's REALLY a sleaze, she starts whining that she's short money for her books for class or whatever else she needs.  Is this right? NO.  However, lots of people (and not just women, men, too, have taken women for a ride) feel like they aren't forcing the other person to buy them anything or do something wrong, so what's the problem?  Well, lots, but I digress.  There's a reason why, once-upon-a-time, it was considered IMPROPER for a woman to accept a gift from a man unless she was interested, and honestly it ought to still be that way - it's certainly how I was raised.

Back on target - it's easy to take advantage of someone.  It goes back to that whole thing of "Nobody can lie to you as well as you can lie to yourself."  Just because you CAN, though, doesn't mean you should.


----------



## Colleen Lindsay (Nov 11, 2010)

It would be easier to take Mr. Sedore seriously if he hadn’t, in fact, been praising Ms. Rector’s editing experience to the entire Internet all year, with posts like this one, left as a comment on Writer Unboxed, in response to a post about whether or not to use a professional editor. This comment was left on March 23rd of this year:

“I hired Donald Maass’ wife, Lisa Rector-Maass to edit my manuscript. She did an amazing job. My experience with Lisa taught me ways to increase pace, write with vigor and to edit myself. Hiring Lisa was more like having a private writing coach. I felt like i left that experience with a new knowledge of writing and publishing. I encourage it for the same reasons Christina Katz gave and for a newbie writer.” – Daryl Sedore

A cursory search of Google brings up even more instances of Daryl Sedore praising agents and in particular Don Maass. For example in this comment left on agent Rachelle Gardner’s blog post on September 21st of this year:

Daryl Sedore said:

“In my experience, most literary agents are great people. In 2006 I spent a week with Donald Maass and his wife, Lisa Rector-Maass (my freelance editor). We had a great time. Had dinner in their home and toured the DML Agency. At the Surrey Int’l Writer’s Conference, I’ve had dinner with a few agents and enjoyed fabulous conversations. So, overall, in my experience, agents have been kind to me and showed respect. If, and that’s a big if, I had to come up with something, it would be disrespect to writers with the use of snark. Sometimes that gets a little annoying as I’ve never seen this kind of thing in a public forum before from professionals.”

This was posted on September 21, 2010 2:16 PM

In light of this, it is difficult to think of Mr. Sedore’s allegations as anything other than a desperate publicity stunt.

For the record, Don Maass and his wife Lisa Rector are good people, honest and ethical, and more importantly, they are good to writers. 

Just setting the record straight. 

All the best.

Colleen Lindsay


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Here's another blogger on this story.
> 
> Quote from the blog: "Do I know this story to be true or false? No. Do I know the people he is discussing? One of them since my second-ever conference 15 years ago. Have I heard a number of stories like this about them? None so blatant, but I regret to say, yes."


So the blogger himself has never had a bad experience, but claims to have heard of bad experiences, therefore this is evidence of the original scam?

This is called piling on. Like when a celebrity gets caught with his pants down, and the next day twenty women come crawling out of the woodwork to sell their stories, even though the alleged events happened ten years ago and there is no evidence.

Where have all these complaints been? Because Preditors & Editors has apparently never received any. Writer's Beware doesn't have anything. And Victoria Strauss at Absolute Write (which has a thread going on about three years about the agency that is nothing but praise and not a hint of scam) offered some points to consider about this author's blog posts.

Sorry. But the more I learn about this the more the blogger stinks. Not a single complaint about this guy on the major author warning sites for years and now all of the sudden I'm to take the word of a guy selling a book on scams and a few people who "heard stories" but have not themselves been scammed.

This sounds less like a misunderstanding and more like character assassination.


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> First, writers really shouldn't pay for anything, other than a few classes and how-to books and maybe a conference here and there.


This is a very general (and misleading) statement for a forum focused on indie authors.

Yes, indie authors will need to spend money on their projects, because they are taking on the role of publisher as well. So services that would normally be provided by a traditional publisher--editing, cover design, marketing--need to be contracted by the author, at their own expense. This is the basic trade-off involved in traditional vs. indie publishing--with traditional publishing, authors shouldn't pay for anything. But there are things that "professionally" published books absolutely need, like competent editing and attractive covers, and indie authors shouldn't neglect to seek out those things even though it does mean investing in your own work.

Also, if an author (whatever their desired route to publication) decides that their work needs a professional edit, and they hire a professional editor, naturally they should pay for that service. This is a valid option some writers might seek out, if they think it would improve their chances of being traditionally published.

Saying "writers really shouldn't pay for anything" isn't true. Writers shouldn't pay for an agent, and they shouldn't pay a "publisher" for costs associated with publishing their work. But I think we can all agree that there are legit ways a writer might spend money on their endeavors.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:



> Sorry. But the more I learn about this the more the blogger stinks. Not a single complaint about this guy on the major author warning sites for years and now all of the sudden I'm to take the word of a guy selling a book on scams and a few people who "heard stories" but have not themselves been scammed.
> 
> This sounds less like a misunderstanding and more like character assassination.


I think the original blog was a bad idea - should have been kept to anonymous, but it's too late for that.

I think Dean added a very good post today, at http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=2348 about the Responsibility of Professionals. This is probably the main thing that should have been said, as opposed to all the rest. It's a little rambling because he's pondering over his own part in the overall advice industry. Here's a major point he makes early on in the essay:

"But what is the underlying reason for this silliness on my part?

"Honestly, disgust. That's right, I started all this because I was disgusted. I just flat got disgusted at writers for not taking responsibility for their own actions, for not taking control of their own businesses, for wanting to be taken care of by anyone with a business card.

"Notice I did not say disgusted with agents or teachers or editors or publishers. I said I was disgusted by other writers."

But he points out that the pros have a responsibility too, not just the editors and agents, but other writers, to be more honest. It's so easy to fall back on being encouraging. It's safe... for the person doing the encouraging. But it can hurt the person being encouraged.

Just more food for thought.

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Colleen, I've enjoyed following your tweets. Sorry this is our first conversation, but so it is. As I see it, the same facts you presented are also evidence that there was no ethical firewall between the editor and agent here. The agent himself says that he understands the need for such a firewall, yet he:

-encourages the writer
-sends the writer a _very_ encouraging email after reading part of his manuscript
-peers over his wife's shoulder at an in-progress manuscript from one of her clients
-tells his wife that he's interested in seeing the manuscript (one month after they all met), and then this is relayed to Sedore
-has dinner with the author in NY
-rides in a limo with the author after dinner in NY
-has dinner with the author at the agent's home
-has the author take a tour of his literary agency

The agent wrote in the comments on part 3 of this blog that, "We work to follow best practices (not reflected in your posts) to keep a firewall between our businesses."

I have to ask, where's the firewall? It doesn't appear--to me--to be there. There's even an explicit agreement that the agent will read the writer's manuscript when the author is done working with his wife. The editor herself also admits that the communication with Sedore (by herself and her husband) involves questionable ethics in an email: "Now, I must tell you that ethically, this is something we almost never do. We do not normally make a habit of sharing client's work, for the simple reason that he is an agent and I an editor - two very separate, though related, professions."

As I mentioned up-thread, I love the agent's books and I recommend them to writers. I've never had an interaction with the agent, but--and I hope this is funny--the day after I finished the first draft of my first novel I had a LONG dream during which I talked to this agent about my book and it was a wonderful, inspiring dream. Subconsciously, that's how much I like the guy!

I think that the arrangement he has with his wife's editorial service doesn't seem to involve a clear enough boundary--even though he is aware that it should be there. He shouldn't IMO be "encouraging" his wife's clients to this extent because then it looks like he's using his not inconsiderable influence to encourage people to pay his wife for her services. There should be a firm boundary between their businesses, and if they were to do that, they wouldn't be having this sort of problem come up. There may be a lesson here for them.

I have nothing against anyone in this situation, but I think this is a real opportunity to look at how all of this happened and how things like this can be avoided in the future.

And no one is perfect on ethical matters. Ethics often involve lots of gray. There's nothing wrong with recognizing that something isn't entirely proper if everyone learns from it and goes forward. I don't think anyone is saying that anyone here is a bad person. We're human beings and we're all learning. Heck, we're all talking about this because we share a love of books. Kum bah ya, you know?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> I think that the arrangement he has with his wife's editorial service doesn't seem to involve a clear enough boundary--even though he is aware that it should be there. He shouldn't IMO be "encouraging" his wife's clients to this extent because then it looks like he's using his not inconsiderable influence to encourage people to pay his wife for her services. There should be a firm boundary between their businesses, and if they were to do that, they wouldn't be having this sort of problem come up. There may be a lesson here for them.


This I will totally agree with. I think if they wanted to be absolutely above-board, they could say that the literary agency absolutely will not represent any author who has been a client of the editors. If they didn't want to be that strong about it, they could put in a time-line of some sort - they won't look at work edited by the wife for a certain period of time (6 mo., a year, 5 years, whatever) after the wife has finished with it.


----------



## tbrookside (Nov 4, 2009)

> I have to ask, where's the firewall? It doesn't appear--to me--to be there. There's an even explicit agreement that the agent will read the writer's manuscript when the author is done working with his wife.


A firewall can be said to exist if the agency never refers business to the editor, and don't receive any portion of the fees the editor generates.

And, frankly, I don't think there is an explicit agreement here that the agent will represent the author when the editor is done with the manuscript.

Let's say the agency's policy is that they won't work with authors with an ongoing business relationship with the editor. That would actually be a good part of maintaining a firewall - if you're working with the agency, you can't work with the editor, and vice versa.

If the agent meets the author at a conference and says to him, "I can't look it at your book while she's editing it, but once your relationship with her ends, you're welcome to submit the book to my agency - it's in my genre and I hear good things about it!" that's actually an example of maintaining the firewall, not violating it. If the author says, "Woo hoo! That means that as soon as I pay this editor a lot of money, I'm totally in with this agent" the author is reading too much into pleasantries.

Basically, to satisfy the ethical threshold you're setting here, agents and editors could simply never have personal relationships of any kind, or an agent would have to definitely state that they would never represent any author once they worked with the editor, for the rest of their career. While that may be a good idea, that's a pretty dramatic requirement to set and doesn't reflect current practice, to the best of my knowledge.


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

This thread has been an interesting read.

I am left wondering if all that has transpired is simply part of a marketing strategy for this guy's book.  Him starting a business that is similar to the situation he is describing and saying he got scammed.  The names being posted and then being removed.

I was wondering why the names were withheld from the start but promised at the end.  Perhaps he was worried that people would tune out the rest of what he wanted to say or would stop reading if they were told up front who the agent and editor were.  Too me, if you are going to point fingers then go ahead and start off with the names.

I am very thankful for everyone's insight into what happened and your words of wisdom on this subject.  If the events of this writers experience is true as posted it would seem to me that it could be he was scammed but it could just as easily be that his ideas are very good but his writing needed a lot of work.

I've read where some of you have indicated that you believe that if a particular story is too poorly written there is no editing that can help it.  But isn't it possible that there are people that believe the opposite and that a poorly written story can be improved to a publishable level?  And if this editor is that kind of person and the story was originally very poorly written then would that not fall into the category of truly trying to help the writer?


----------



## KevinMcLaughlin (Nov 11, 2010)

Anyone else here bothered that the guy who mistrusted his own editing skills so much that he paid $10,000 to have a bunch of editorial passes is now charging $2499 for editing other peoples' books?
Or that he's charging $799 for Smashwords conversions
Or that he's trying to bill $999 for setting up a blog for someone?

Maybe I'm way off, but I can't help thinking the only person who would pay $799 for a Smashwords conversion is a clueless newbie desperate to be published, who simply didn't know any better.  Taking advantage of such people puts a bad taste in my mouth.


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

daveconifer said:


> Hey Mr. Kilborn / Konrath,
> 
> Just curious about something. Are you saying that I shouldn't hire an editor to take a look at my current WIP? I'm less worried about grammar, punctuation and style. Good or bad, my writing is what it is.
> 
> ...


Find a writer's group. Every library, college, and bookstore has them. Better to learn on your own and through your peers, for free, than pay someone.

The thing is, editing services come with the promise "Hire me and I'll make your book better." But does "better" mean "publishable"? And what is "better" exactly? Fixing typos? Helping grammar? Suggesting plot devices for the lag in the middle? At what point does editing become co-writing, and who can judge if advice is good or not?

When your peers judge you, majority rules. When you pay someone to judge you, who is to say that their advice is worth what they charge.

I'm really good at editing my peers--to the point where I've read dozens of manuscripts by friends, and offered suggestions that they wound up taking. In fact, I've been thanked in so many acknowledgments I've lost count.

But I'm a professional writer, so I have actual publishing experience. Also, I NEVER charge anyone for help.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

tbrookside said:


> A firewall can be said to exist if the agency never refers business to the editor, and don't receive any portion of the fees the editor generates.
> Let's say the agency's policy is that they won't work with authors with an ongoing business relationship with the editor. That would actually be a good part of maintaining a firewall - if you're working with the agency, you can't work with the editor, and vice versa.
> 
> If the agent meets the author at a conference and says to him, "I can't look it at your book while she's editing it, but once your relationship with her ends, you're welcome to submit the book to my agency - it's in my genre and I hear good things about it!" that's actually an example of maintaining the firewall, not violating it. If the author says, "Woo hoo! That means that as soon as I pay this editor a lot of money, I'm totally in with this agent" the author is reading too much into pleasantries.


In this case, though, the agent did encourage the writer to work with his wife in a number of ways that look significant to me. According to Colleen's post, the agent even took the aspiring author on a tour of his literary agency, had dinner with the author at the agent's house, rode in a limo with him, and so on.



tbrookside said:


> And, frankly, I don't think there is an explicit agreement here that the agent will represent the author when the editor is done with the manuscript.


I didn't say that. I said, "There's an even explicit agreement that the agent will read the writer's manuscript when the author is done working with his wife." That's true. There was a dangling carrot here, that the agent would consider the author's work for representation when the author was done working with his wife in her editorial role.



tbrookside said:


> Basically, to satisfy the ethical threshold you're setting here, agents and editors could simply never have personal relationships of any kind, or an agent would have to definitely state that they would never represent any author once they worked with the editor, for the rest of their career. While that may be a good idea, that's a pretty dramatic requirement to set and doesn't reflect current practice, to the best of my knowledge.


I disagree. The first standard might be that a husband and wife team (whether it's agent/freelance editor or agent/acquisitions editor or freelance editor/acquisitions editor) shouldn't be actively "encouraging" clients together when and if there's a clear financial conflict of interest.

There's also a difference between simply having a personal relationship of some kind, and having a direct financial relationship with that person. In this case, the agent essentially makes 100% of the money that goes to the editor because the editor is his wife. How many similar situations can we compare this to? Very few.

Up-thread, I gave the example of Lou Aronica, who runs both a freelance editing service and a publishing imprint at the same time. Again, here is the official policy on one of his websites, which shows that this sort of ethical boundary can easily be adhered to (in fact, that it's a smart business move to adhere to it):

"The Story Plant is an entity entirely separate from The Fiction Studio. Working with me on an editorial project would not be an avenue toward publication by The Story Plant. In fact, it would be the opposite of that, as I would not want any issues of conflict of interest to arise. Similarly, if you were to submit a manuscript for consideration by The Story Plant (submission details are on the website) and we did not find your manuscript appropriate for our list, I would not then suggest that we enter into an editorial arrangement with The Fiction Studio. I have tried very hard to keep profit motives out of any decision regarding my handling a project, and this is simply too much of a gray area."


----------



## Guest (Nov 11, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Two things.
> 
> First, writers really shouldn't pay for anything, other than a few classes and how-to books


Says the man with a how-to book...

  

Forgive me. Couldn't help myself. You know I'm ornery.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> You know I'm ornery.


I'll drink to that...a little later in the day.


----------



## Christine Merrill (Aug 19, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> -encourages the writer
> -sends the writer a _very_ encouraging email after reading part of his manuscript
> -peers over his wife's shoulder at an in-progress manuscript from one of her clients
> -tells his wife that he's interested in seeing the manuscript (one month after they all met), and then this is relayed to Sedore
> ...


But none of this actually means anything. I can't and won't speak much more about the specifics of the rest of it, since I wasn't there and don't know the people.

But I can tell you for sure that most of this stuff happens all the time. Editors and agents sometimes eat and ride and visit with unpublished authors. They might wine and dine because it is deductible. And they might or might not say encouraging things. But they might just be hungry, heading to the airport at the same time, or trapped at a party and unable to get away from a needy writer without chewing their own leg off.

Unless they say "I want to offer you representation" or "I want to rep your work" specifically, it means nothing to them. You are not a client. You are a social acquaintance. Lunch is food. A limo is a ride. Do not read more into it.

And the "I will look at it when it is finished" is not all that encouraging. It is something they can say to get rid of you, since they know that the majority of people will never finish. And if they do, looking at a manuscript can result in _passing on the complete _ Possibly even with a form rejection.

This is also why you see form rejections, contests with no feedback given, vague brush offs and general rudeness from editors and agents. To some people, any encouragement is seen as being one step from a sale.

Been there, done that. As have many of my friends. I was young and innocent... I had dreams... But I did not spend money on a book doctor. No harm, no foul.

Agents always want to _see_ things. Because they might be good. But though it does not hurt to make connections through a friend of a friend (or a wife and editor), once the connection is made it is totally up to the author to finish the book in a way that is saleable (both polished and marketable).

In the end, no amount of knowing someone and spending money will get you closer to success than you can by writing a good book.


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Jack Kilborn said:


> At what point does editing become co-writing ... ?


Thanks. That's ALWAYS lurked in the back of my mind when I think about this.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Christine Merrill said:


> But I can tell you for sure that most of this stuff happens all the time. Editors and agents sometimes eat and ride and visit with unpublished authors. They might wine and dine because it is deductible. And they might or might not say encouraging things. But they might just be hungry, heading to the airport at the same time, or trapped at a party and unable to get away from a needy writer without chewing their own leg off.


I have absolutely no problem with agents and editors meeting with aspiring writers, having dinner together, etc. I was just at the World Fantasy Convention, where plenty of that sort of thing goes on.

But in this situation, you have a husband/wife agent/editor team, where both the agent and the editor are dangling the carrot of representation in front of the writer and telling the writer that once he's done working with the editor (which ended up costing him around $10K) that the agent will talk to the author about representation. The agent also said things to the author like this by email:

"As I think 'Gwen' mentioned, I could not help reading over her shoulder the first 20 pages or so of PREMONITIONS, which are gripping. If you're willing, I'd love to be in line to read the manuscript once you are through the development and editing process. I hear nothing but good things from 'Gwen' about your professionalism. With an opening this good, too, there's no doubt that this is a manuscript I'll want to read."

That's not just a, "I will look at it when it is finished." That's going to elicit a very emotional response from the writer.

If Sedore's editor wasn't the agent's wife, then the agent and Sedore could have all the dinners and agency tours they want. The issue is that all of the money going to the editor was also going to the agent because it was his wife.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Arkali said:


> This I will totally agree with. I think if they wanted to be absolutely above-board, they could say that the literary agency absolutely will not represent any author who has been a client of the editors. If they didn't want to be that strong about it, they could put in a time-line of some sort - they won't look at work edited by the wife for a certain period of time (6 mo., a year, 5 years, whatever) after the wife has finished with it.


And if I was advising him on PR, that's what I would recommend: Come out and admit that because of how his he and hiw wife handled this situation, there were unfortunate and unintended consequences for Daryl Sedore. Apologize sincerely and say that you regret what happened.

Then commit to a new policy that his wife's clients are ineligible to be considered for representation by his literary agency, make it a public announcement perhaps, and probably make that explicitly clear on their websites, too.

And frankly if they don't change their policy now, then I think it makes them look guilty as charged.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> Saying "writers really shouldn't pay for anything" isn't true. Writers shouldn't pay for an agent, and they shouldn't pay a "publisher" for costs associated with publishing their work. But I think we can all agree that there are legit ways a writer might spend money on their endeavors.


Ummm, yes and no.

Professional proof reading and copyediting, a professional designer? Yes, those are reasonable to pay for.

Hiring an editor to help shape your manuscript into publishable shape? No no no.

I do know good an honest book doctors, but the relationship by its very nature is a bad one, and filled with conflicts of interest. This is something I learned when I was doing freelance coverage - when you're doing coverage for a producer or publisher you have a clear cut standard, and who you are serving is clear. When you do coverage for a writer you're just making your best guess, and in the end the writer is paying your bills.

Yes, putting a book up on Kindle is easy... but writing is NOT. Writers need to learn their freaking craft, and take their prose seriously and not second guess themselves with "experts". BE the expert, d**n it!

Take classes, learn from your peers. Give critiques to get critiques. STUDY. Read great books. Read lousy books. Figure out the difference.

And, imho, you should be writing and submitting short fiction to real publications - even the cheesy little web-rags will involve interacting with an editor much of the time. And some of those editors will be really bad - but that's a valuable experience too, because you learn that such people are not gods.

(Oh, and btw, the reason it's okay to pay for books and classes is because it's clearly education. Editing is a whole different ball of wax.)

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Yes, the problem is more than scammers who intentionally mislead young authors. Authors (even those who are old and experienced) are easy to mislead. We often get desperate, and cling to the most amazingly silly notions as long as they keep us going. In some sense, we NEED to delude ourselves to get through the process.
> 
> And any pro in the business knows this.
> 
> ...


This was such a good point, for me, that I'm just bumping it again. You're really making me think about the potential repercussions of encouragement. I believe there is a karmic relationship anytime you advise someone and encourage them to do something.

On the other hand, I love hearing the success stories and about what's possible. I'm so grateful to people who share those and give a glimpse into their worlds. But you are reminding me that whenever you do that, you have to balance the intended (or unintended!) encouragement with heavy doses of grim reality, too.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> On the other hand, I love hearing the success stories and about what's possible. I'm so grateful to people who share those and give a glimpse into their worlds. But you are reminding me that whenever you do that, you have to balance the intended (or unintended!) encouragement with heavy doses of grim reality, too.


As I mentioned in that, we do need our delusions, and cling to them. It just makes us vulnerable - so we have to learn to manage it, and help each other in keeping from being sucked into that black hole.

BTW, the link I posted earlier to Dean Wesley Smith's latest post has a GREAT comment by Laura Resnick on the responsibilities of new writers, and what new writers can do to help themselves. It's the very first comment. http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=2348

"TO ASPIRING WRITERS: If you want to enter one of the most competitive professions in our society, then you need to take responsibility for that choice. No one made that choice for you, and I'll bet dollars to diamonds that no one ENCOURAGED you to make it. (Well, no one SANE, anyhow.)"

She goes on to explain the following headings: Learn the business, practice your craft, be gracious, don't kid yourself.

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

KevinMc said:


> Anyone else here bothered that the guy who mistrusted his own editing skills so much that he paid $10,000 to have a bunch of editorial passes is now charging $2499 for editing other peoples' books?
> Or that he's charging $799 for Smashwords conversions
> Or that he's trying to bill $999 for setting up a blog for someone?
> 
> Maybe I'm way off, but I can't help thinking the only person who would pay $799 for a Smashwords conversion is a clueless newbie desperate to be published, who simply didn't know any better. Taking advantage of such people puts a bad taste in my mouth.


The Smashwords conversion looks very high to me; I definitely think he should lower that price, even if just because it looks bad to charge that much.

The blog may or may not be high, depending on how much design work goes into it. If it's just using a free theme, then yeah that looks too high, but I don't know if they design original art and layout for their blogs.

The editing is a tricky one. $2,499 for a full edit that includes line-editing isn't necessarily a bad price if the work is really good (though I wonder why it's a set rate rather than a per word rate). And having paid $10K for editing doesn't mean he can't edit; then again it might. It really depends on how much he has learned. He's written books and worked with pro editors, so maybe he would be good at it. I have no idea, though.

I will say that they have some good covers in their portfolio (I like the first and last ones), even if the price is up there.

On his 'Publishing Exposed' book, btw, I am going to check it and see what I think. Even if you don't like a guy (I'll admit: his story makes me want to pull for him), he may have some interesting info. People didn't like Jose Canseco for his accusations about steroid use in baseball, but as the years go by more and more of what he said has been proven true.


----------



## Christine Merrill (Aug 19, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> With an opening this good, too, there's no doubt that this is a manuscript I'll want to read."
> 
> That's not just a, "I will look at it when it is finished." That's going to elicit a very emotional response from the writer.


Yes, it will elicit an emotional response.

I am here to tell anyone who will listen _ ignore that response._ Bask in the glow for a minute. And then get back to work. Agents do not take on new writers based on a partial manuscript, no matter how good it sounds to them.

In the excerpt above, he did not say he would offer representation. He said he'd read. 
If he said he would talk about representation? He still did not offer to rep the work.

It sounds good. And you have to have an agent that is enthusiastic about your work. But it means nothing until you are holding a signed contract or a big check minus %15.

We can go round and round about firewalls and ethics of publishing. But really, we have to work on our end of the interaction, which is where the change needs to start. Writers need to work on craft, take praise and criticism with equal amounts of salt, and keep their feet on the ground.

Boring, I know.

Writing is art. That is where the nurturing and encouragement can occur.
But publishing is business. Do not let your head be turned by kind words and promises. Get it in writing.


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Ummm, yes and no.
> 
> Professional proof reading and copyediting, a professional designer? Yes, those are reasonable to pay for.
> 
> ...


Look, if someone just plain can't write, and they decide to hire an editor for educational purposes, and that editor provides guidance and feedback that the prospective author finds helpful, I simply don't see what's bad or evil about such a relationship. Yes, writers need to learn the craft and shouldn't depend upon a book doctor to write their book for them. That's not what I'm talking about.

I worked extensively with an editor assigned by my publisher for my first published novel. I was young and had a lot to learn--this editor taught me more than any book, class, or critique group ever has. She's that good. Obviously I did not pay for the editing she performed, since she was working for my publisher. But do I think that an indie author who chooses not to go the traditional route is dumb or ill-advised to seek out a similar relationship with a professional? Absolutely not. It was like a one-on-one crash course in the craft of writing. At the end of the process I had rewritten my manuscript and it was better. The editor did not write it for me. She simply gave me blunt feedback from a place of experience, and she was right.

Now, because that editor offered story critique and writing tips, instead of just copy editing, was the relationship bad by its very nature? Not from where I'm standing. My subsequent submitted drafts have required far less editing, because I learned so very much during that first experience. Could I have learned the same stuff through books, seminars, etc? Sure. But instead I entered into a relationship with a professional who acted as a mentor--and who remains a friend.

She has over 20 years professional editing experience. She has worked for large NY publishers. She never attempted to write my story, nor alter my voice. She left me wiser for having worked with her, not dependent upon someone else to "doctor" my books.

I hate black-and-white statements. Editors are not the freakin' enemy. A good editor can be as valuable as any book you can buy or seminar you can attend. Critique groups are great, but if I had the choice between receiving guidance from a professional with 20 years of experience helping authors make their books the best they can be, or a critique from an amateur author from a writing group, I'd pick the pro. No author benefits from writing in a vaccuum, and the outside advice/critique one receives from books, seminars, and writing group partners are all just as subjective as the advice one would receive from an editor. The difference is that an editor provides a targeted, specific interaction from a place of experience. The others don't (potentially...depending upon who's in your critique group and how generous they are with their time!).


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

KevinMc said:


> Anyone else here bothered that the guy who mistrusted his own editing skills so much that he paid $10,000 to have a bunch of editorial passes is now charging $2499 for editing other peoples' books?
> Or that he's charging $799 for Smashwords conversions
> Or that he's trying to bill $999 for setting up a blog for someone?
> 
> Maybe I'm way off, but I can't help thinking the only person who would pay $799 for a Smashwords conversion is a clueless newbie desperate to be published, who simply didn't know any better. Taking advantage of such people puts a bad taste in my mouth.


I understand he's not doing this himself - he's acting as a packager and outsourcing to professionals. Even so it does leave a sour taste in my mouth as well.

As for the prices.... I wouldn't want to do that job for any less. I will do it for myself, of course, but I prepare the manuscript for conversion from the get go. Most people don't. Clearing up the mess of someone who can't do it for themselves is a major job, and usually takes many times the work of doing it for a pro.

If the editing were a professional copyeditor and a professional proofreader - that price is not out of line. The question is whether he's offering the same kind of touchy feely editorial services that he got.

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> I hate black-and-white statements. Editors are not the freakin' enemy. A good editor can be as valuable as any book you can buy or seminar you can attend. Critique groups are great, but if I had the choice between receiving guidance from a professional with 20 years of experience helping authors make their books the best they can be, or a critique from an amateur author from a writing group, I'd pick the pro. No author benefits from writing in a vaccuum, and the outside advice/critique one receives from books, seminars, and writing group partners are all just as subjective as the advice one would receive from an editor. The difference is that an editor provides a targeted, specific interaction from a place of experience. The others don't (potentially...depending upon who's in your critique group and how generous they are with their time!).


I'm not doubting the value of an editor. I'm saying that freelance editing is by nature a slimy business. You only get REAL professional editing in a situation where the editor is being paid by the publisher. That's a pro. As soon as it becomes a private business arrangement, it becomes a problem.

The thing is, there ARE no shortcuts. You can say "oh paying this great mentor made me what I am," but that's like saying "oh, writing in this genre made my book a bestseller." It's a sucker's game to follow that kind of advice.

And I'm actually saying the opposite of what you think I'm saying (I think). I'm saying that the writer has to learn his or her craft. Has to gain experience with real editors. Has to put it on the line with your WRITING, not with your check book. Put in the time, put in the learning.

A writer has to take responsibility.

Camille


----------



## flanneryohello (May 11, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> I'm not doubting the value of an editor. I'm saying that freelance editing is by nature a slimy business. You only get REAL professional editing in a situation where the editor is being paid by the publisher. That's a pro. As soon as it becomes a private business arrangement, it becomes a problem.
> 
> The thing is, there ARE no shortcuts. You can say "oh paying this great mentor made me what I am," but that's like saying "oh, writing in this genre made my book a bestseller." It's a sucker's game to follow that kind of advice.
> 
> ...


I agree--a writer has to take responsibility.

I'm still a little uncomfortable with the statement that freelance editing is by its nature a slimy business. Obviously there are slimy editors out there. There are also, I'm sure, perfectly legitimate and competent editors who choose to do freelance work for whatever reason. Maybe they were laid off from their job at a traditional publisher (times are tough!). Maybe they wanted to "go indie", just as many authors do. Judging someone negatively for not being attached to a traditional publisher seems fundamentally unfair--especially here!

Authors who do not have the opportunity to work with a professional editor in a situation where they're being traditionally published shouldn't discount the potential value of working with a freelance (also professional) editor. If someone who can't write hires an editor thinking that it's a shortcut to being published--that they don't NEED to perfect their craft, because someone else can be paid to do the heavy lifting--well, that's ridiculous. And I would recommend that people only hire a freelance editor with demonstrable experience (you know, an actual professional), and hopefully only after receiving a personal recommendation or checking out examples of their work.

There are slimy people in any business, but I don't think all freelance editors should be painted with the same brush. Again, black-and-white statements like this rarely hold up to scrutiny. I'm sure there are plenty of writers out there who have had beneficial relationships with freelance editors, who feel they got their money's worth, and who went on to become better writers because of the experience.


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> There are slimy people in any business, but I don't think all freelance editors should be painted with the same brush. Again, black-and-white statements like this rarely hold up to scrutiny. I'm sure there are plenty of writers out there who have had beneficial relationships with freelance editors, who feel they got their money's worth, and who went on to become better writers because of the experience.


Ah, before this gets confused lets be clear. A shaper-editor is someone who is like a private story coach, this is a subjective, slippery area that can be worth the money or not depending. A copy-editor is not subjective. Something is either grammatically correct or it isn't, you don't have to worry about them because it isn't subjective.

The ethical slide comes when someone who has a subjective role in the game um&#8230; has a never ending role. I took a class from someone who offers shaping and later asked if he would edit my work. He told me "no point" you know all the things I look for, what I feel is important, it would be a waste of your money. One exhaustive pass by a shaper and you need to find yourself another shaper, a fresh perspective, or move on to another story.


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Says the man with a how-to book...
> 
> 
> 
> Forgive me. Couldn't help myself. You know I'm ornery.


My how-to book is free on my website. www.jakonrath.com/writers.htm 

And the blog that spawned the majority of the entries is free. jakonrath.blogspot.com

I get a million hits a year on my blog, and many times people have offered to monetize it, from Google ads to buying ads outright. I've always said no. I don't mind advertising, but not in the same breath as trying to help new authors. I know that if I allowed ads, the ones that appeared would be iUniverse and the like, which would be hypocritical.

I've taught college in the past, and have also been flown around and paid good money to lecture about writing and marketing and ebooks, but in all of these cases I was underpaid. I did this as a favor, not as a source of income.

Some agents generate a nice chunk of their yearly income selling how-to books and lecturing. It doesn't matter if their lectures and books are helpful. What matters is they are taking money from writers, and the only time an agent should do that is by selling that writer's book.

I offer hope for free. I don't feast off of it.


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Newbie writers are an easy breed to prey upon. 

They could be doctors, lawyers, business professionals, well-educated, in their normal lives. But once they put on the writing hat they become needy, naive, floundering, and susceptible. I've seen it happen over and over again.

Since the start of the publishing industry, there have been those who prey upon this naivete. Anyone can call themselves an agent or a freelance editor. 

You should always know what you're paying for, and whom you're buying from. But smart people make dumb choices when it comes to their writing, because there is so much insecurity and hope involved.

Early on, I realized that if I'm going to help another writer, I can't take money for my help--though my help may indeed be valuable. It's too much of a slippery slope.

While EVERY writer can improve when exposed to a solid teacher, only a SMALL NUMBER will actually go on to be successful. Suddenly you aren't selling a solid, reliable system to break into this industry. You're simply selling some writing tricks, wrapped in hope.

Selling hope is dangerous. Better to give it away, lest you have no fiscal or moral responsibility to those who don't succeed.

The people I have helped to get published probably would have done it without my help. I was a catalyst, but they were solid writers who would have found their way eventually.

I've never heard a story about some writer who got scammed who then became a huge success. Usually because those who get scammed are deluding themselves somehow.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Wow.  My respect for you just went through the roof.  Thank you for a very kind and thoughtful post.


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Newbie writers are an easy breed to prey upon.
> 
> They could be doctors, lawyers, business professionals, well-educated, in their normal lives. But once they put on the writing hat they become needy, naive, floundering, and susceptible. I've seen it happen over and over again.
> 
> ...


Thanks for all you do, Joe.

I'd also like to point out that I've been to writers' conferences where New York Times bestselling authors teach newbies intensively for a week and do this for very little or even gratis. In fact, at the Maui Writers' Retreat, Terry Brooks and John Saul actually donated money to the conference, and took no payment, in order to keep the costs down. These are people, including you Joe, for whom I have the utmost respect.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Newbie writers are an easy breed to prey upon.
> 
> They could be doctors, lawyers, business professionals, well-educated, in their normal lives. But once they put on the writing hat they become needy, naive, floundering, and susceptible. I've seen it happen over and over again.
> 
> ...


I wanted to just quote part of this for simplicity but I just couldn't cut anything.

Thank you, Joe.

Considering all the crazy maelstrom of hope and despair that is a writer, I think the thing we all must remember is the old zen koan: *When the student is ready, the teacher appears.*

When a writer is ready to learn, they can learn from whatever is at hand. We are all surrounded by resources we don't recognize, and we all have access to resources we hardly imagine. But you can't see them until you are ready.

I think the key is to stop looking for _The Answer_, but to be open to what you learn, to take it all for what it's worth. That means doing things like going after traditional publishing. Like talking with readers and writers of all sorts. Like questioning the common wisdom, and considering all sides. (And maybe seeking out various points of view, and remembering that it isn't a contest - maybe each side has something to offer.)

Camille


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Newbie writers are an easy breed to prey upon.
> 
> They could be doctors, lawyers, business professionals, well-educated, in their normal lives. But once they put on the writing hat they become needy, naive, floundering, and susceptible. I've seen it happen over and over again.
> 
> I've never heard a story about some writer who got scammed who then became a huge success. Usually because those who get scammed are deluding themselves somehow.


Jack,

I agree with almost everything that you said and I also commend you on the work that you are doing on behalf of writers. I do however take exception to your last statement. Scamming is a very subjective thing; take my case for example. At the time I was scammed by the book doctor and his cohort, I was a very successful investment banker, former trial attorney, and former engineer. Yes, I was naive as to the ways of the publishing industry, but I had been trying to get my story published for over six years when I was told by the "agent" that he thought my book had potential, but could use a book doctor to help push it over the goal line. Understand that this book had gone through some of the top agents in the business and, also, an executive editor at Random House; all of whom thought that the novel had merit, but "was not strong enough."

I researched that agent as best as I could (I was in South Africa at the time establishing a private equity fund) and could find nothing that raised a red flag. Blame it on naivete if you want, but those words from the "agent" sure sounded like what I had been waiting to hear for a long time. $1,500 sounded high, but I did not know the industry as you correctly point out as I was not fully engaged in the publishing business. So I took the hook.

To say that I or any other scammed first time author will not have what it takes to be a successful author is insulting. If you take the time to read _Falling Star_ (for which I have actually sent you a query if you are in fact also Joe Konrath) and then tell me that you think I do not have what it takes, then so be it, but to make that assertion because I was scammed is beneath you.

Phil Chen


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

flanneryohello said:


> Obviously there are slimy editors out there. There are also, I'm sure, perfectly legitimate and competent editors who choose to do freelance work for whatever reason. Maybe they were laid off from their job at a traditional publisher (times are tough!). Maybe they wanted to "go indie", just as many authors do. Judging someone negatively for not being attached to a traditional publisher seems fundamentally unfair--especially here!


Again, I'm not saying that they aren't good people with good intentions. I'm saying that the business itself is inherently a little sleazy. I could have made a lot of money doing this myself, but I just couldn't stomach it. I will give critique for free when I have the time (which I don't often), but I will only do practical jobs for work for other writers. Only work without judgment factor or a promise. I was comfortable with a synopsis service, for instance.

Copy editing is respectable, imho, and a valuable service. And I'm sorry if freelance editors need to scrape up work. IMHO, becoming a teacher would be a better thing, even doing workshops.

Camille


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Since we're talking about agents, I interviewed Laura Resnick recently for a podcast and the first topic we discussed was whether or not an author needs an agent, how often bad agent experiences happen to authors, etc.. Laura and Dean have been the main contributors at Dean's blog this year when it comes to agents. Laura is interesting because she's had a long, solid career as a traditionally published novelist, but she's found that having agents doesn't work for her and she's had four agents along the way.

I'm going to put the audio interview on my blog for a limited time to share with anyone who is reading this (I might only post it here and at Dean's blog) because it's going to be on another podcast next month so I don't want it to be too easy to find yet. But here's the page where the interview is. The audio player is just above where it says, "I, Film Guy."


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> I researched that agent as best as I could (I was in South Africa at the time establishing a private equity fund) and could find nothing that raised a red flag. Blame it on naivete if you want, but those words from the "agent" sure sounded like what I had been waiting to hear for a long time. $1,500 sounded high, but I did not know the industry as you correctly point out as I was not fully engaged in the publishing business. So I took the hook.


I didn't mean to insult you, Phil. But I do know quite a few people who have been scammed, and none of them have found success. Hence my point.

New writers are all naive. Me included. But even the tiniest bit of research brings up Writer Beware and Predators and Editors, and endless threads about scams.

No one on the NYT bestseller list got there because they paid someone.



Philip Chen said:


> To say that I or any other scammed first time author will not have what it takes to be a successful author is insulting. If you take the time to read _Falling Star_ (for which I have actually sent you a query if you are in fact also Joe Konrath) and then tell me that you think I do not have what it takes, then so be it, but to make that assertion because I was scammed is beneath you.


It isn't up to me to tell you if you have what it takes or not. I can't help authors on a case-by-case basis. I blog, and occasionally post here and elsewhere, offering advice. But to do it one-on-one would be a full time (and thankless) job.

We all are insecure about our work. It comes with the job. My advice is always the same. Join a writers group. Hone your craft. Go to conferences. Read. Keep writing. That is what makes you a success. There are no shortcuts.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Jack,

My concern with your comment was that you categorically lumped all people who have been scammed into one lot.  I was not asking for a "one-on-one" review of my novel; I was making the point that to say someone doesn't have what it takes to be successful simply because they got scammed by a sophisticated ring is incorrect, in and of itself.

Peace.

Phil


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> My concern with your comment was that you categorically lumped all people who have been scammed into one lot. I was not asking for a "one-on-one" review of my novel; I was making the point that to say someone doesn't have what it takes to be successful simply because they got scammed by a sophisticated ring is incorrect, in and of itself.


My evidence is anecdotal.

Be the guy that proves me wrong.

The point I was trying to make (apparently ineffectively) is that there are no shortcuts. There is only hard work and luck.

The "shortcut mindset" doesn't help a writer improve their craft. It presupposes that all it takes to get published is a book and some $$$. That mindset means the writer isn't honing their craft, paying their dues, or learning the business.

A writer with a shortcut mindset indeed is a writer who will probably never succeed, because they are looking for a quick fix rather than concentrating on improving their writing and understanding the industry.

If you've learned from being scammed, then hopefully you realize that there are shortcuts, and don't have that mindset. If that's the case, your chance of success is the same as anyone else's.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I also think it worth noting that not everybody admits all of their mistakes from when they were young and foolish.

I do also know of a successful non-fiction writer who was caught in a scam, but she recognized pretty quickly what was happening.  Unfortunately, these people were REAL crooks, and not at all well meaning, and they went after her in some pretty evil ways when she exposed them. (Like publishing her home phone and address on a rape-fantasy newsgroup with an invitation to all comers.)  She went after them after that, and shut them down multiple times in various states, if I remember right.

Camille


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> The point I was trying to make (apparently ineffectively) is that there are no shortcuts. There is only hard work and luck.


Jack,

On this point you and I agree completely. However, please do not assume that I, or any other novice writer for that matter, was looking for a shortcut. I certainly wasn't. I was responding, as I thought I made clear, to the criticism by many legitimate agents and publishers that my novel was "not strong enough". I took that to mean I needed an editor. That was how I got scammed; not because I was looking for a shortcut. If you knew me and what I have accomplished in my life, you would understand that I simply do not take the easy way out on anything that I have done.

Phil


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> I also think it worth noting that not everybody admits all of their mistakes from when they were young and foolish.
> 
> I do also know of a successful non-fiction writer who was caught in a scam, but she recognized pretty quickly what was happening. Unfortunately, these people were REAL crooks, and not at all well meaning, and they went after her in some pretty evil ways when she exposed them. (Like publishing her home phone and address on a rape-fantasy newsgroup with an invitation to all comers.) She went after them after that, and shut them down multiple times in various states, if I remember right.
> 
> Camille


  Good for her!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Does anyone know the history of the editor? I don't. Did Jane Austin, Melville, Clemens, Dreiser, Lewis, and Steinbeck have editors? How about agents? When did they come on the scene? Did these authors have agents?


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Did Jane Austin, Melville, Clemens, Dreiser, Lewis, and Steinbeck have editors? How about agents? When did they come on the scene? Did these authors have agents?


I believe Donald Maass represented each and every one of them.

But that's just rank speculation . . . like much of this entire thread.


----------



## CIBond (Aug 28, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> The "shortcut mindset" doesn't help a writer improve their craft. It presupposes that all it takes to get published is a book and some $$$.


It is interesting how much $$ the people are willing to sink into their first book on the premises that someone can save it. I don't know if it is hope or hubris but it does seem strange. I was told in a conference that your first four books are probably not publishable and by the fifth one you have got the hang of story telling. On the other hand e-publishing makes them easy to stick on line and getting feedback from readers will help to speed up the writer improvements. I am paying for a copy-edit (about $600) but I wouldn't pay much more to improve my first book, I'd rather focus on the second.

 I know everyone is now super excited about going off to buy my marvelous novel but sadly it won't be available until around December.


----------



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

MosesSiregarIII said:


> On his 'Publishing Exposed' book, btw, I am going to check it and see what I think. Even if you don't like a guy (I'll admit: his story makes me want to pull for him), he may have some interesting info.


I read the sample.


----------



## JA Konrath (Apr 2, 2009)

Philip Chen said:


> Jack,
> 
> On this point you and I agree completely. However, please do not assume that I, or any other novice writer for that matter, was looking for a shortcut. I certainly wasn't. I was responding, as I thought I made clear, to the criticism by many legitimate agents and publishers that my novel was "not strong enough". I took that to mean I needed an editor. That was how I got scammed; not because I was looking for a shortcut. If you knew me and what I have accomplished in my life, you would understand that I simply do not take the easy way out on anything that I have done.


Then I misunderstood you, Phil. My apology. I'd thought you'd paid an agent, which is something authors should never do.

As far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't pay editors either. There are some legit editors, but there is always a risk you get taken. Real agents NEVER suggest freelance editors. It's a big conflict of interest.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Jack Kilborn said:


> Then I misunderstood you, Phil. My apology. I'd thought you'd paid an agent, which is something authors should never do.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't pay editors either. There are some legit editors, but there is always a risk you get taken. Real agents NEVER suggest freelance editors. It's a big conflict of interest.


That has been my mantra since getting scammed. Thank you again for everything that you have been doing for those of us coming up the line.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Does anyone know the history of the editor? I don't. Did Jane Austin, Melville, Clemens, Dreiser, Lewis, and Steinbeck have editors? How about agents? When did they come on the scene? Did these authors have agents?


Sigh

In the 18th and 19th centuries, publisher and editor were often one in the same person. So yes, they had editors. It's only in the 20th century that you find the clear line of demarcation between the title of publisher and editor due to the consolidation of the industry and the rise of mega publishers.


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2010)

Wow, they took all of the posts down! I was going to make a joke in the "Who's your affordable editor thread" that mine was this lady who charged $10,000 but now I can't!


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> Wow, they took all of the posts down! I was going to make a joke in the "Who's your affordable editor thread" that mine was this lady who charged $10,000 but now I can't!


I noticed that earlier today, but just figured it made sense to let this thread sink like a stone if that's what's going on now.

Daryl Sedore wrote on his blog, "I have pulled the Scam Alert posts as I am tired of the hate mail and threats. I offered my story so that writers could get a look into what happened over the last six years with some popular people in the industry. All that story seemed to do was have people attack me and threaten both me and my family ..."

Dean Wesley Smith also said, "I have pulled down my last three agent posts. No reason other than I got tired of the hate mail. Take the discussion and the hate somewhere else ..." Dean mentioned yesterday that seven more people contacted him just yesterday with stories about the agent recommending his wife's editorial services at his workshops.

This is one of the reasons you don't hear about the overwhelmingly majority of issues in the publishing world. It's usually easier to kept things swept under the rug. Remember that just because you don't see anything on 'Predators and Editors' or similar sites, it doesn't mean there haven't been any issues.


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2010)

7 more people? Wow. Yeah, no matter what you think about the dumb author, or even the couple working together to sucker people, even just milking somebody for years and years is wrong. Hearing about the threats is definitely surprising. Who really needs to come to their defense that badly?


----------



## R. Doug (Aug 14, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> 7 more people? Wow.


And this is what's bothering me about the whole thing: the absolutely ridiculously low number of people "stepping forward" with the same accusation considering the thousands and thousands of people this agent has probably dealt with over the years.

There are a higher percentage of people out there who still believe Barack Obama wasn't born in the U.S., and that John McCain was.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

foreverjuly said:


> 7 more people? Wow. Yeah, no matter what you think about the dumb author, or even the couple working together to sucker people, even just milking somebody for years and years is wrong. Hearing about the threats is definitely surprising. Who really needs to come to their defense that badly?


It doesn't surprise me at all.

Regardless of whether anyone was scammed or not, public personalities in the publishing industry attract groupies. Actually, even when there aren't famous or powerful people involved - sometimes it happens just with online sites and workshops. Among the normal newbies are often more borderline personalities who invest more than money. They invest their whole being - and criticism of the thing they're investing in is a threat. Whether it's questioning a rule they have learned to hold sacred, or suggesting that their greatly worshiped guru is less than perfect - you can get death threats.

Camille


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> I noticed that earlier today, but just figured it made sense to let this thread sink like a stone if that's what's going on now.
> 
> Daryl Sedore wrote on his blog, "I have pulled the Scam Alert posts as I am tired of the hate mail and threats. I offered my story so that writers could get a look into what happened over the last six years with some popular people in the industry. All that story seemed to do was have people attack me and threaten both me and my family ..."
> 
> ...


It is a shame that some people believe it is OK to send hate mail and threaten other people all because they chose to explain how they felt about a particular agent and editor.


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> Remember that just because you don't see anything on 'Predators and Editors' or similar sites, it doesn't mean there haven't been any issues.


And just because an author hawking a book on scams posts a blog about a scam without evidence to support it doesn't mean it actually happened.

He's playing the martyr role right now. He got his free ink by naming names without evidence, and now he's playing the martyr by pulling the posts even though his story is already out there. It's called deflection. You get called out over something, and instead of addressing the issue you try to turn it around and make it about something else.

Let's be honest. He knew darn well he would get hate mail for posting his little tale. *HE WAS COUNTING ON IT.* This is why he "went public" instead of filing a formal report with the appropriate agencies. He was never looking for a resolution to his so-called problem. This wasn't a "warning." It was an attempt at publicity via controversy. He got what he wanted.


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> He got his free ink by naming names without evidence... He got what he wanted.


I'm ditching my marketing plan for Wrecker based on this. Instead I'll be blogging about how Oprah Winfrey slipped into my basement and erased my hard drive. By the time I'm exposed I'll be on the NYT bestseller list!

Oh yeah, I might work a fetish sex scene in and alert the Amazon forums about it...


----------



## Guest (Nov 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> And just because an author hawking a book on scams posts a blog about a scam without evidence to support it doesn't mean it actually happened.


It would have been awesome if he'd printed some email messages or text messages or something.


----------



## Blodwyn (Oct 13, 2010)

CIBond said:


> It is interesting how much $$ the people are willing to sink into their first book on the premises that someone can save it. I don't know if it is hope or hubris but it does seem strange. I was told in a conference that your first four books are probably not publishable and by the fifth one you have got the hang of story telling. On the other hand e-publishing makes them easy to stick on line and getting feedback from readers will help to speed up the writer improvements. I am paying for a copy-edit (about $600) but I wouldn't pay much more to improve my first book, I'd rather focus on the second.
> 
> I know everyone is now super excited about going off to buy my marvelous novel but sadly it won't be available until around December.


I agree with this. Your first novel is for learning how to write. I think my book, which is my first, is very solid, readable, and enjoyable, and it's gotten good reviews, but I'm still developing my "voice." That is something that happens in time, and I'm okay with that. One of the nice things about putting stuff out online is you can get feedback and readers for the early stuff, you can develop yourself as a writer. My second book is much better  for the effort.


----------



## Scott D. Covey (Dec 11, 2010)

I sent my book (yes it has an ISBN NOW, so it is not a mss) to the Maass agency twice. Unlike many other agents that rejected it both of the rejection letters were personal, polite, and timely. The first rejection over a year ago was from Donald himself and he suggesting cutting it down as it was a bit large for a first time writer. I took this to heart and did so, knowing the advice was sound. The second submission was about two months ago. I had done a blanket submission session at the end of the Surrey Writers Conference and had pitched a Rep from Maass again and been asked for 100 pages. I got a request for exclusive rights to represent from another agent, but had heard nothing from the Maass agency. Lots of agents don't respond if they are not interested but this had not been my experience from the Maass agency nor was their reputation. So I phoned the agent that was handling my submission, out of courtesy. Somehow it had got lost in the ether. She had never received it, apologized, and asked me to resubmit. Knowing it was under a deadline she read it over the weekend and got back to me, an unknown, in two days! It was obvious she had read the whole submission from her comments and it was one of the nicest rejection letters I have ever received. She wished me all the best with the other agency and thanked me for submitting again. So I guess for me reading the way this agency has been pulled through the mud is a little upsetting. While I have no relationship with the agency, they have a stellar reputation and from my personal experience with them nothing suggests otherwise. There were no offers of editorial work, or false hope building. Just keen observations and suggestions to make it better and positive reenforcement to continue on. Something all writers can use after getting two hundred, "Not for us" slips.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Abd they say there is no such thing as necromancy.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

kyrin said:


> Abd they say there is no such thing as necromancy.


:snickers:

Okay - anyone else find it strange that someone comes to KB and registers to post one and only post in a thread that's been dead for a month? And yes, I looked - they registered today. Weird.


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Yup then again I find a lot of things strange.


----------



## Christopher Smith (Aug 3, 2010)

I have a fantastic agent.  Couldn't have hoped for a better ally.  Here's an idea--go with a highly respected, A-list firm.  You pretty much won't go wrong with those at the top.  They expect great things from you (great writing, characters, plot), but they deliver in return.


----------



## JoeMitchell (Jun 6, 2010)

daveconifer said:


> I'm ditching my marketing plan for Wrecker based on this. Instead I'll be blogging about how Oprah Winfrey slipped into my basement and erased my hard drive. By the time I'm exposed I'll be on the NYT bestseller list!
> 
> Oh yeah, I might work a fetish sex scene in and alert the Amazon forums about it...


With a story like that, Oprah might even give you an interview, in jail. You'll sell tons more books. Unfortunately all the proceeds will go directly to pay off her lawyers, but you'll be famous!


----------



## Scott D. Covey (Dec 11, 2010)

Arkali said:


> :snickers:
> 
> Okay - anyone else find it strange that someone comes to KB and registers to post one and only post in a thread that's been dead for a month? And yes, I looked - they registered today. Weird.


My research assistant found it and mentioned it to me and in reading how one of the best agencies, both in ability and polite service to all was getting slagged I responded. No conspiracy theory; yes I did just register today. Been too busy writing stuff that pays the bills to follow too many blog posts. But this p*ssed me off so I wanted to add a little reality to the thread. As for the one post, I really didn't see anything else that I felt I could add intelligently too. I may in the future but not if the outcome is pure drama for dramas sake.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Thanks for that, Scott.  At the same time, this thread was dead, gone, and probably 99% of the people who'd posted in it had forgotten about it.  Now it's back.  As Kyrin said:  Necromancy at its finest 

That said, welcome to KindleBoards.  It's a nice place to hang out


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Christopher Smith said:


> I have a fantastic agent. Couldn't have hoped for a better ally. Here's an idea--go with a highly respected, A-list firm. You pretty much won't go wrong with those at the top. They expect great things from you (great writing, characters, plot), but they deliver in return.


That unfortunately is not the case, regarding the "won't go wrong" part. I've heard horror stories about many of the "top" agents (that's agents, plural) just as with low-level agents. The ones that aspiring writers most respect can abuse their position the most (some do this, some do not).


----------



## SuzanneTyrpak (Aug 10, 2010)

Scott D. Covey said:


> But this p*ssed me off so I wanted to add a little reality to the thread.


Thanks for posting Scott. Kindle Boards is a great forum where people have a chance to express their views.

What I've noticed about reality: it varies. And, as Moses says, people have different experiences (some great, some not) at all levels of the writing industry.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> That unfortunately is not the case, regarding the "won't go wrong" part. I've heard horror stories about many of the "top" agents (that's agents, plural) just as with low-level agents. The ones that aspiring writers most respect can abuse their position the most (some do this, some do not).


You are correct, Sir. And I know this from personal experience. My former agent is known as well as anyone in the industry and has a great rep too because he treats editors and fellow agents well, but he shat on me, one of his authors. I'm not naming names or going into details because it would be me who suffered if word got out. (The industry knows him, they don't know me. Guess whose side they'd take?)

Now I'm with a new, unheralded agent, albeit at a well known agency, one of his first clients. He's been straightforward, honest, communicative and thus far committed to the project. What a nice change!


----------



## kyrin (Dec 28, 2009)

Scott D. Covey said:


> My research assistant found it and mentioned it to me and in reading how one of the best agencies, both in ability and polite service to all was getting slagged I responded. No conspiracy theory; yes I did just register today. Been too busy writing stuff that pays the bills to follow too many blog posts. But this p*ssed me off so I wanted to add a little reality to the thread. As for the one post, I really didn't see anything else that I felt I could add intelligently too. I may in the future but not if the outcome is pure drama for dramas sake.


It must be nice to have a research assistant who finds forum posts that are a month dead. In all honesty, there's no reason to be pissed considering both sides of the issue were represented. There are good and there are bad agents. That's the reality of the situation. In the future, it might be better if you directed your outrage at the ones who actually wrote the articles / blog posts concerning the Maas agency and not people who were having an intelligent conversation about them over thirty days ago.

In any case, welcome to the boards. This is a friendly close knit community of readers and writers. Kick back, relax and get to know people. There are plenty of active threads and topics.


----------

