Advertise Here
Want to advertise here? Get started for as little as $5

The OG Reviewers : Forum : RULES FOR GROUP ALL MEMBERS RE..


RULES FOR GROUP ALL MEMBERS REPLY PLEASE

15 Years Ago


THE OG REVIEWERS RULES FOR GROUP

1)THE MEMBERSHIP TO THIS GROUP IS NOT OPEN. IT IS ON AN APPROVAL ONLY BASIS. IF YOU WERE APPROVED, YOU HAVE SHOWN MERIT AS A WRITER OR REVIEWER AND WE WELCOME YOU TO THE FORUM AND LITERATURE DISPLAY IN HOPES OF LEARNING FROM AND WITH YOU.

2)THIS GROUP IS NOT FOR STANDARD REVIEWING. WE EXPECT MORE FROM OUR MEMBERS.

3)DO NOT SUBMIT WORK THAT YOU DON�T WANT CRITIQUED.

4)WHEN YOU ARE CRITIQUED PLEASE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE REVIEWS GIVEN AND DO NOT USE THIS AS YOUR STAGE FOR ARGUING. IF YOU DISAGREE WITH A REVIEW, PLEASE SEEK THE PERSON PRIVATELY OFF THE GROUP AREA.

5)GIVE CREDIBLE REVIEWS. BY CREDIBLE, WE REQUEST THAT YOU CLEARLY ILLUSTRATE A CONSTRUCTIVE REVIEW.

6)CONSTRUCTIVE REVIEWS MUST CONTAIN:

A)CONTENT COMMENT � WAS THE CONTENT GOOD, CLICH�, READABLE, ENJOYABL,E DULL, ETC.
B)GRAMMAR/STYLE � ANY IMPROVEMENTS?
C)5 SENSES � DID THE WRITING REACH ANY OF THE FIVE SENSES, PARTICULARLY IF IT WAS A POEM?
D)WHAT CAN BE DONE TO IMPROVE THIS PIECE?
E)WHAT WOULD YOU PERSONALLY WRITE DIFFERENTLY?

I THINK (E) IS THE KEY TO TELLING THE TRUTH � YOU KNOW WHY YOU LIKE SOMETHING OR DID NOT HOW COULD YOU MAKE IT BETTER AND WHY? TELL THE TRUTH!

7)THE POINT IN THIS GROUP IS NOT TO MANGLE FEELINGS BUT TO TELL THE TRUTH AND HELP WRITERS CRAFT THEIR SKILLS. YOU CAN GO ELSEWHERE TO GAIN FLUFF OR READ BULL S**T.

THE RULES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AS THEY ARE NEW, HOWEVER, IF YOU ARE NOT HERE TO REVIEW, YOU ARE WELCOME TO LEAVE. IF YOU LEAVE LESS THAN CREDIBLE REVIEWS, YOU WILL BE BOOTED AND REQUESTED NOT TO RETURN.

QUID PRO QUO GUYS � READ, LEARN, TEACH.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Sounds good. Is it ok though if I don't feel like reviewing in depth at the moment? I plan to begin once my own story is out, but for now I think I'll stick to poetry.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Okay, read and agreed.

However, I don't know if I'll be spending much time reviewing this following week, as I have to finish Madame Bovary in French and am trying to write two stories -- but I do intend to be active in a near future.
[send message][befriend] Subscribe
JlB

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Rules sound good to me, let me look aroud more, I haven't been here in a while.

jlb

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Oh, I got it! No problems from me... I should easily be able to get some good reviews in... Though I am starting to get flooded by requests...

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Well, before you start reviewing Gomez, maybe you should read the second catagory of critic below.

There are two threads on this subject, so I'm just gonna post it on both since I'm not sure which to put it on. Forgive the redundancy...

BAD CRITICS:
...the only thing worse than a bad writer is a bad critic. From my experience, bad critics usually fall into 3 categories:

ONE: The Reactor

These critics are relatively harmless. Usually they just let you know what general impression they got from your work. They like to say things like, "neat piece," "It seems awkward" but cite no specific lines or sections, nor do they even explain why they like or dislike a work, or suggest any sort of remedy to fix a work. Reader responses are a good barometer for a writer to get a decent idea of what his/her work achieves (or not). But if a writer receives these types of critiques exclusively, not much progress can be made.

TWO: The Psychologist

This type of critic automatically assumes that the narrator/voice of a piece IS the author. And based on this premise, sitting high aloft on a golden throne, s/he proceeds to psychoanalyze a complete stranger based on a single work. They tend to say stuff like, "you're not being honest with yourself," "you're a chauvinist," "you have a peter pan syndrome," etc... These Freudian frauds bask in the warmness of their moral, spiritual and artistic superiority. O Where would we be without them...

THREE: The Philosopher

This species of critic is my favorite. S/he lurks in the fog of internet obscurity, making pithy, esoteric remarks that sound something like, " the sweet voice of the poet; sweet voices play far softer on the soul than beating drums; and may be sung with aged or ageless words..." O how they get off on the sound of their own voice or words on the screen. These Nietzschean-Underground Men-Sewer dwellers grace us with such poetic reviews that cost much, but say zilch. If you press them to clarify or spit it out, they will simply respond with even further generalities and human truths that none but s/he could possibly comprehend.

Some may want to add a fourth kind, the "Typo" class of critic who will tell you that it's "alter" not "altar" or are Grammar Nazis who point out "That coordinating conjuction needs a comma before it" or "that run-on sentence needs a period here," but I personally find them helpful and I morph into one from time to time when the technical aspects really get in the way of the work.

Happy Easter!

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


[color=indigo][/color]
Hey Lola,

A heartfelt thanks for inviting me here. It sounds like a group for serious writers and I certainly hope I'll fit in here. I should have read this at the jump and saved you all my nuisance messages with all the banal questions.

Anyway, you'll not have trouble from me. This sounds like what I've been looking for; a refreshing departure from the congeniality club-mentality so prevalent on many posting sites. I "Oye" everything you've posted! Sending you wishes for a colorful Easter Sunday... the good egg that you be! Sarai

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


These rules seem alright, nothing too tough to stick to. Now, off to review something!

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Thats the whole point. Review, rip apart a piece. Dont be mean about ripping it apart, but break it down to the core, and make a ton of suggestions. A helpful in depth review/analysis is what makes us better writers. We write for ourselves, but must keep in mind that the readers may have a totally different outlook, and we have to please them as well. I would rather have a folder full of suggestions than a handful of "it was pretty goods". Creative criticism is never meant to be hurtful. No one should be mad about creative criticism. If they are, they should stop sharing their work. (unless the critic is just being a jerk and not being helpful, of course.)
Hope to hear from you guys, I've already reviewed some of the authors in this thread's work previously. Be sure to return the favor!

-Mark

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Agreed! The only problem comes from the fact that oftentimes it seems like there's nothing I can tell someone to improve their work. I know nothing is perfect, but I've read a few that come pretty close to being so. You know, with the exception of punctuation and the minor spelling error. :P

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Umm... Yeah... Understood? No... I find it exceptionally annoying when I submit a piece about "Alan, the man who likes to masturbate into public drinking fountains." to a fiction writing class, and from then on become the introverted pervert in my classmate's eyes. Wait, are you saying I review in that way? I don't get the point of directing the information to me?

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Read it and agreed... My reviews are going to be sparse for a bit though; college is insane and I just lost my job, so stress is piling up.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


That sounds wonderful, I am making an attempt to read and review as much work as possible. Time is always a factor, you know that. But trust me I will not dissapoint you.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


read

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


I am one of the most fair judges there is. I hate arrogance of one who knows they are exceptional writers and use it to "kick" those whoms writing is considered beneath theirs. However, as one who has been critiqued, I love those who critique out of concern of wanting to see someone's potential. It's a given to come across those reviewer's who feel they know the difference between constructive criticism and "evil" ...they don't. If I don't critique, then the piece didn't need it (in my opinion). Thanks

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


I totally agree CyclicalYellow.. I try to point out the flaws in the writing, the grammar, spelling, wording, etc... and try to explain why something may seem out of place or not needed. I hate when reviews are just "I didnt like this, I just didnt feel it." or something. I want to know what about it you didnt feel, why did you miss it, what could improve it? I think the problem is that people just want praise. You know, the popular "But thats how I wrote it." crowd. I hope this group can pick up the slack for all of those people, and help each other become better writers, and maybe make a friend or two on the way.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


you are always yelling lola, jeeez

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Read and understood. Thanks.

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


Duly noted ::biggrin::

[no subject]

15 Years Ago


I've read it and I like it. This is why I'm here. I want to give reviews to people who can take it and not get s****y about a suggestion or two and I want to get reviews - constructive, intelligent reviews . . . i.e., I want to get better (in regards to both my writing and my reviewing skills).

I have noticed, however, that I tend to stray from saying anything about the pieces that I think are just plain awful . . . is that bad? I have also noticed that I haven't gotten very many reviews . . . which is making me think that all of my stuff stinks. How do we get more reviews if we want them? I've been tryin' really hard to keep giving them . . .

First Page first
Previous Page prev
1