Give me a ****ing break.

If rules are rules, you have just broken them yourself: ****. Are rules still rules when they pertain to you?


"Our differences are what make us interesting."

"The more I experience the world, the less I realize I know."

This was posted by TN on the original Writer's Club forum in 2001. It's an excerpt.

quote:

---

Excerpt from "Written Communication"

When reviewing other's writing
Don't be cruel but do be thorough.
Point out good as well as bad aspects of the document.
Don't point out a problem without suggesting how to overcome it. The suggestion doesn't have to be in complete detail, but at least a general suggestion is essential.
Tell the author whether you can easily see what the key message is and say what you think that key message is.
Point out any text which is irrelevant or confusing.
Point out any errors of spelling, grammar or punctuation.

Responding to a reviewer's comments
Don't take criticism to heart. Having been at the sharp end of some savage criticism myself, I fully appreciate that it is sometimes difficult to avoid a damaged ego. You must approach the process in a constructive way and focus on the aim of making the document better for your readers.
You don't have to agree with everything your reviewer says. Feel free to consider but reject a suggestion. However even if you think the reviewer must have been stupid not to understand a particular section, consider the possibility that it may indicate an ambiguous or confusing element of your writing which is not apparent to you. Maybe if you could write it better even a stupid person like your reviewer would understand. In my own writing, I nearly always change things in response to a reviewers comment, even if I think that the comment is wrong or silly. The change I make may not be one suggested by the reviewer, but it is my attempt at overcoming whatever problem with the writing caused the reviewer to miss the point.
Thank your reviewer, and if appropriate acknowledge them in the final document. If a reviewer makes a major contribution, you might even consider making them a joint author.
~Copyright David J. Pannell, 1998, The University of Western Australia
http://www.general.uwa.edu.au/u/dpannell/lec981.htm

---

I have on several occassions apologised in public for anything I did wrong once it was revealed in that light to me.

The case with Waterlily is exactly a case like that, and I wish it had been mentioned sooner.

To Waterlily: I apologise for the words I used, their tone, and the crass nature of it all. What I did was within the rules (the deleting of a poem, but replacing it back in a day later), but the way I did it was out of bounds. So to you, a public apology.

---

Now, having said that, with the topic at hand, being criticism, I think TN's (via FairGwen's post) shows there should be a more open critique on the board.

And critique already sounds like a better word.

It's been stated here by EE at least, and possibly others, that someone like me should be free to critique while others do what they do and post positively. Well...the problem is, everyone's posting positively, from my observation. That's my beef.

"To run away from danger, instead of facing it, is to deny one's faith in man and God, even one's own self. It were better for one to drown oneself than live to declare such bankruptcy of faith." - Mahatma Gandhi, 1946

Now there's maturity at its finest.

And for that, you've just earned a ton of respect from me James.

I hope the efforts of those who truly wish to see the poetry forum improve and thrive pays off. It can start with one, and if done correctly, the examples set will inspire others to join in.

~I intend to live forever -- so far, so good.~

I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing
than to teach ten thousand stars how not to dance
- e e cummings

Conferred the Walrus Memorial Award - 6th April, 2004.

In my opinion Song_bird you have just done B.O.H a dis-service!

As I have stated: The difference between knowledge and understanding is huge.

On this one I’m leaving myself open / going out on a limb.

-------

My guess is that B.O.H knows that but doesn’t quite know why.

If I’m wrong, so what.

The only person who can criticise me on this one is B.O.H. Whatever you might think you think.

---------

B.O.H
I concur with you on the word critique and its use.

But!
Can you define and separate the words critique, criticism and criticise?
So that you know exactly why, when and how to use them – yourself?
I think not.
At least not yet.

All you get from me is half a brownie point.
So!
You worked out one dumb word, big deal.
Define the rest, then you’ll get the other half .
Maybe?


-------

Experience is the hardest kind of teacher. It gives you the test first, and the lesson afterward. ~ Anon

Common sense is the measure of the possible; it is composed of experience and prevision; it is calculation applied to life. ~ Henri Frederic Amiel


***

Grasp the subject and the words will follow.
~ Cato the Elder (or censor) 234-149bc Roman. Statemans, orator and writer.

Oh gawwwwd.

Critique - to analyse, to explore, to note improvements, in short, the same way the word is used in an academic discourse.

Criticise - similar but can lead to personal attacks, as far as Im concerned.

"To run away from danger, instead of facing it, is to deny one's faith in man and God, even one's own self. It were better for one to drown oneself than live to declare such bankruptcy of faith." - Mahatma Gandhi, 1946

I don't get it.

Let critics critique. Let people who want to post 'nice' comments post those. The way I see it, I just stopped posting poems because I just stopped writing poems. It had nothing to do with critics being nasty and sarcastic. Admittedly, I was never one to critique when I posted responses to poems. Infact, I would go out of my way to respond to poems which didn't get any responses at all.

The way I saw, it was my way of showing appreciation to the underappreciated respective member so he or she would post a bit more. I mean don't get me wrong in my responses I did spelling checks and grammatical semantic checks and recommended changes if there were any.

I thought responding to poems was meant to be simple and we as a community are all 'nice' people in general.

I don't get how members would stop posting if they got 'nice' responses.

Anyway this is my 2c

I shall show myself out now

~D

[This message was edited by D_w on 06-15-07 at 02:36 AM.]

quote:

---

I don't get how members would stop posting if they got 'nice' responses.

---

Im certainly not saying that. I'm saying either a) the quality of poetry or b) our means of improving/nurturing each other will fall under constant cooing and coddling.

"To run away from danger, instead of facing it, is to deny one's faith in man and God, even one's own self. It were better for one to drown oneself than live to declare such bankruptcy of faith." - Mahatma Gandhi, 1946

oh no, by no means do I want to say everyone has to be nice to each other. I mean, if I was in your place I would have *definitely* deleted waterlilly's second poem like you did.I reckon you did the right thing. I will not comment on how you worded it because its not my place.

There are excellent critics out there - from the top of my head i would say fair, luvleetasha, rhon, fuzzboy, twistopher. I am not saying everyone has to be nice, all I am saying people should be allowed to be nice.


~D

quote:

---

Originally posted by requote:
In my opinion Song_bird you have just done B.O.H a dis-service!

---

He apologized publicly and admitted he was wrong in regards to what I had been commenting on so how is it a dis-service to BOH to tell him that this was a mature thing to have done?

I ain't touching WHAT he says when he critiques a poem. I no longer post my stuff here so I'll leave that up to the ones who do. I was only commenting on HOW he addresses members.

Although I must admit that the "Oh gawwwwd" comment knocked him back down a few notches.

~I intend to live forever -- so far, so good.~

I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing
than to teach ten thousand stars how not to dance
- e e cummings

Conferred the Walrus Memorial Award - 6th April, 2004.

To Song_bird,

An apology given without reason is just another way of saying sorry. That means the only thing the person is sorry about is having being caught out.

In other words nothing changes.

Of course the proofs in the pudding and that B.O.H provided.

However an apology I owe you.

My comment “dis-service” was my experience talking.
I don’t doubt your response to B.O.H was given with the best intentions.
Nothing personal is meant or implied either to you or B.H.O.
Experience is one thing no one gets for nothing.
The value of experience can only be understood in retrospect.
The moment anything becomes personal – one of two things happen.
1 – The plot is lost, anger and irrationality enters.
2 - The opposite.


To accept an apology is to understand that the person offering the apology understands the reason for the apology.

Kind regards

Requote


***

So, going back on topic. I have another suggestion.

Maybe what we need to do is list the rules at the top of the PPF just like in the DF, with a note that says "See Tutorial". And the tutorial could have that excerpt I reposted.. as well as maybe more details.

This will solve the problem of "mean" critiques, because they will be in violation of the rules if they don't cite a reason for the negative critique and explain how it could improve.

"Fawning" would simmer because a person would have to cite at least one reason for liking the poem. It's a much harder problem to stop, but I think with a wider breadth of critiques suggested, it might just fade on it's own. After all, we like each other and want to improve ourselves and QL... it just so happens that it's sometimes faster to reply to a poem we like with a simple sentence.

If we hold our critiques to the same estimation that we hold our poetry, with a set of rules/definitions/examples/tutorials for the people who don't know where to start, well then... we might just see an improvement in both critiques and poetry/prose.

Thoughts?

BOH:
Well...the problem is, everyone's posting positively, from my observation. That's my beef.

What is your definition of posting postively? If it includes a point where the author can improve? Is that still posting positively? These are about half the comments I recieve. That's still a critique.

Fawning implies that you are just saying ooh, for ooh's sake, not because you truly like what someone has said. A sort of brown-nosing, if you will.

If something touches me, I will respond. If it does not speak to me, I don't. If I see something I think might help, I say it. I don't feel poetry is an objective kind of thing. Its not A B C. You never know if the author intended to do something in a way you may not agree with.

I don't often make negative comments, because I don't post on what I don't understand or what I think might need improvement, but can't offer any solid suggestions. And when I do I will try to temper it with kindness. I will say what's good about it. That's how people learn. You say you have this, this and this right, however you need work here.

What I did was within the rules (the deleting of a poem, but replacing it back in a day later)

Absolutely. That is your job. Rules keep the world from chaos. And thank you for your apology. Everyone deserves respect. There's so little of it going around. I apologize to you too. My previous posts on this thread were disrespectful, as well. When you answer disrespect with disrespect, it only creates more disrespect.

Gwen

"Fawning" would simmer because a person would have to cite at least one reason for liking the poem. It's a much harder problem to stop, but I think with a wider breadth of critiques suggested, it might just fade on it's own.

Most of the posts I recieve already do this.

"Our differences are what make us interesting."

"The more I experience the world, the less I realize I know."

[This message was edited by Waterlily on 06-15-07 at 06:20 PM.]

Boh:

quote:

---

2) My willingness to critique isnt in question. It's the blatant disregard for other people's poetry, want to improve (there's no onus on this being an academic site but it's respectful to others in your wanting them to improve) because there is nearly NEVER any critique on the posts at all. So what if it's 'finished'? So what if it isnt the Workshop? If there's something that needs work, say it as honestly as possible. If you dont like criticism, grow up.

---

Unbridled honesty comes through as nastiness, pure and simple. If honesty is not combined with respect and kindness, it's merely an instrument wielded by an un-grownup who enjoys smashing and bludgeoning others. Nastiness is neither pretty nor admirable, nor will it do anything towards attracting new QL writers, let alone retaining mature veterans.

As for fawning, it is what it is and certainly not as destructive (if not constructive) as unhelpful criticisms. Most of us who've been writing and cyber-posting in the last decade have had our belly full of fawning and can spot insincerity in a heartbeat; we certainly don't need nanny-moderators 'protecting' us from flatterers. (That said, I recognize moderating is a thankless job, one that requires the wisdom of Solomon at times.)

Waterlily

quote:

---

Cutting people to the bone is not how you help them improve. Secondly, not everyone wants to be Hemmingway or Bronte. They have their voice. We have our own. You need to recognize that.

---

Amen. Selah. Wise words, Waterlily (alliteratively noted, I might add). Being a fairly new member, you are able to look at this current thread with little 'emotional baggage' as do some of the rest of us who have a long history of vested interests here.

Rhon831

quote:

---

I know there are other writers still on the boards - I see their names on all the other forums. So how do we get them to start participating on PPF again?

---

I'll answer only for myself..... when PPF [and for that matter most forums across QL's board] feels like a "Cheers" kind of tavern where I can let down my hair, kick off my shoes, smoke a pipe, and swill a pint of beer (metaphorically speaking) with folks who are able to self-govern themselves. My table-mates may express scintillating viewpoints at odds with my own, but they manifest a maturity and tact that earns my respect, and may even persuade me to change my mind. Currently, PPF [as well as GD and Suggestion Box] feels more like a saloon where there's a palpable tension in the air: "us" versus "them" and each empowered sheriff or gunslinger has his hand hovering above his holster, ready to shoot first and ask questions later of patrons. The saloon metaphor is appropriate for DF, but not in the other fora. Thanks, but no thanks; "real life" is nasty enough.


Fair_Gwen

quote:

---

If we hold our critiques to the same estimation that we hold our poetry, with a set of rules/definitions/examples/tutorials for the people who don't know where to start, well then... we might just see an improvement in both critiques and poetry/prose.

---

My 02 cents: Nothing quenches creativity, spontaneity, muse inspirations, etc. more than a bunch of dead rules and a cookie-cutter formula ("I liked blah-blah-blah because fill-in-the-blank." "I didn't like blah-blah because fill-in-the-blank."). I can see the value in a tutorial and perhaps a few guidelines for posting replies/critiques, but this whole analytical approach reeks to cadaverous proportions. Writing admirable poetry / poetical prose / prosetry is a rather organic, mystical endeavor. But so is writing an encouraging reply or critique (nor do they have to be mutually exclusive). I'll close with a reply [condensed] I crafted in an old PT thread dealing with the same problem of how to critique effectively but w/out being rude:

Airedale
Senior Member
posted 11-13-05 12:34 AM

Just this last week a consultant was brought into my place of work to discuss ways to improve one's communications skills. On a daily basis, according to this consultant, we rely on these forms of communication:

20% of the time written word
45% of the time verbal (voice tone and inflections)
35% of the time non-verbal (actions)
100% of the time listening (using eyes & ears)

Now, in QL's Poetry Forum, we have a wee problem: we can't rely on audible tones and inflections in a critiquer's words nor can we assess his non-verbal body language. This means any "honest" critique will not be softened by nuance.... which means you have a recipe for disaster if tact and respect are not carefully tendered.

I think the "Write Your Own Bad Poem" Workshop thread, Fuzzies, was brilliant b/c it allowed participants to be free to make mistakes or poke fun at no one's expense while ginning up subtly in participants' minds "What is GOOD poetry?"

I agree with Flaming Mo, however, that a critique that chases off writers like Lilred, is counterproductive....

Not everyone comes to QL Poetry forums looking for an exhaustive, philosophical dismantling of their poem. I've been to sites where all the members know how to do is critique in the most erudite, cold fashion; they haven't seemingly an ounce of humor or generosity of spirit. What makes for the best kind of forum is a kind of synergism where one person's "genius" or inspiration is sparking another's in an environment that feels "safe".... and by that I mean only that one is amongst friends. (Imagine QLers in a cyber-tavern, feet warming before a crackling fire in the fireplace. How would our tavern friends feel if some acquaintance banged open the door and gales of Arctic air blew in while he flung his arms about and yelled at them in a rather nasty tone? I for one would prefer fireplace cameraderie to fisticuffs.)

I haven't posted poetry in a long time, but, when I did, the comments I loved the most were not those where someone nitpicked my grammar, structure, etc. but rather where they replied in such a way I could hear the respect, kindness, humor, sometimes love between the lines. Where I learned more about the replier's lovely soul than I learned about my writing faults and strengths.

For me, it's all about what we communicate, knowingly or unknowingly, between the lines. Not those replies written to look blatently smug, harsh, sophisticated or clever.

Words mean things. Perhaps it's because I'm a biblical theist; those who are "people of the Word" lend more weight and credence to what it means to be a wise wordsmith. To speak truth and not dissemble. To speak truth with agape-love. Love without truth is weak; truth without love is cruel. Those who embrace a Judeo-Christian worldview are persuaded God holds us accountable for every word we speak and write.... perhaps because there is more dunamis-power in the written and spoken words than we can dare imagine.

~ Shalom ~

------------------------------
The opposite of joy is not sorrow. It is unbelief. ~ Leslie Weatherhead
Picture me with my ground teeth stalking joy--fully armed too, as it's a highly dangerous quest. ~ Flannery O'Connor

Love without truth is weak; truth without love is cruel.

Well-said.

"Our differences are what make us interesting."

"The more I experience the world, the less I realize I know."

My Wish for QL
Before You Tear Yourselves Apart:

I haven’t been here for too long.
Thus my perceptions may be all wrong.

The QL intent was for learning
But some people seem to be yearning,
For a sense of respect that’s all gone.

I don’t understand why it’s so hard
To treat your fellow posters with some regard.
There are real people behind the pen.
Make your negative positive always again.

Couch your negativity.

If our words are weapons,
And they can be indeed,
Then our words also can be
A nurturing, kindly seed.

I come here for fun
And yet again, I see
The sparring has peaked
To the nth degree.

Why must everyone
Take things so personally?

But yet again,
Some are so rude.
In this unending feud.

I think it’s a matter
That must be viewed
Most seriously.

This is my plea.

So many words have been spent
In this infinite rent.
So many. So intelligent.
Just get beyond this discontent.

It does you no honor.

You are all very neat.
But I must repeat.
Why don’t we just try
To all get along?

Does it really matter
Who's right and who's wrong
In this unending song?

QL is great
But I think people hate
Having their words held up
For paroxysm of late.

You don’t all have to agree.
And that’s a problem, I see.
Can’t we all
Just agree to disagree?



"Our differences are what make us interesting."

"The more I experience the world, the less I realize I know."

[This message was edited by Waterlily on 06-18-07 at 11:34 AM.]

[This message was edited by Waterlily on 06-18-07 at 11:35 AM.]

Look at this ... enough 2 cents to make 20 bucks.

Everybody got it now ... let's just move on. Clap clap clap ... go on home now. There is else nothing to see.


"Nunc Scio Quit Sit Amor"
But it's still not premarital sex
if you don't plan on getting married

A further update to this story........ I got the chance to meet Kylie last Saturday. She is just gorgeous and radiates serenity. One of those sort of people. That's the first time I've ever met someone from net life in person and I'm just amazed at how genuinely personality and spirit come across in net contact. She signed the little book that I had originally found. Amazingly, she had written that one 13 years ago at 22 years of age and just persisted uncompromisingly with her style since then.

Anyway, she is sending me an invite to her Murdoch Press book launch in February next year to see her wonderful dream come true and I'm just so honoured! Maybe I'll get a photo of the occasion for the thread and just to seal the testament to the fact that poetry doesn't have to conform to anyone elses standards, just your own and whoever wants to read it whether it be forum dwellers or huge audiences like Murdoch Press's!