Re: Erosion

whheydt@xxxxxxxxxxx (Wilson Heydt) wrote on 14.04.06 in <Ixpx5o.2J1@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

In article <1145026379.313113.188260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
obilon <lcgd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You people always pick out the parts that make me sound ignorant and
obnoxious while forgetting to mention the parts where I say over and
over that I am here to learn from published writers like yourself.

This may be a bit difficult....

That is *not* what is happening. People are commenting on the parts
of your posts where they have some insight or interest. this often
means that they disagree with you. It doesn't mean that they're
picking on you. It doesn't mean they think you're ignorant. It
means they have something to say about what you said. Simple as
that.

The parts they *don't* comment on are generally the points the agree
with you about, or are so obviously true that there is nothing
further to say on the point.

This is the *very* common pattern in usenet posts. It's one of the
reasons that the traditional advice was to read a newsgroup for a
couple of weeks before posting and why newcomers were automatically
subscribed to newsgroups specifically written to give advice to new
posters. Unfortunately, news archive sites (especailly Google News)
mean that many newcomers no longer 'hook up' through a newsreader
and miss out on the advice they'd get the traditional way.

Don't blame the archives.

This went wrong long before, when the first big commercial sites popped up
- they didn't understand that Usenet posters need educating, so they
ignored the initial newsgroup subscription thing. Of course, soon after,
so did newsreader authors - if there's usually no useful default
subscription, why bother applying it?

Thus, Endless September.

And it didn't help that the new-user newsgroups themselves melted down
under spam.

Places like Google at least allow one - if one actually goes to the
trouble - to do the "read for a few weeks" thing in a lot less time, by
looking over the archives.

Of course, it's still necessary to know that this is important ...

it's
very frustrating trying to have a conversation with someone who is only
out to say, "Look, I know better so shut up and listen to us
experienced writers you hack." Doesn't work for me. You keep skipping
the quotes where I post that I want some advice and to learn not just
promote my one avenue out of many that I am trying to get published.

The last item I recall seeing where you asked for advice was about
'finding a good editor'. There was a rsponse to that, though
primarily about what it would cost.

Like in any conversation, everyone has their own ideas what they want to
talk about. Sometimes, this overlaps enough that one can have a great
conversation. Sometimes, it connects just enough to be utterly
frustrating. Usually, it's a bit of both.

And if one hits someone's hobby-horse, or pet peeve, or whatever, it's
really, really hard to get the topic away from that point.

agents and publishers as well. If you'd listen as much as you like to
put me in my place you'd see that.

I don't get the impression anyone's trying to "put you in your place".

I do, on the other hand, get the distinct impression that *you* are trying
to put *other* people in their place.

Kai
--
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
"... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it."
- Russ Allbery (rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
.

Relevant Pages