NFL player participates in a pro-am golf tournament, befriends some LPGA ladies, and several of them move into his house when they aren't on tour. When he is traded, several of them move with him. This damned pandemic has my sleep cycle screwed up and I sat up all night trying to remember the name of this story and how the story ended.
Someone else asked a question where that was the answer within the last two weeks, they were concentrating on his first girlfriend and his mother.
YEah, just scroll down to the topic titled, "Mom dies and girlfriend becomes a stripper."
I guess it all depends on how you read the story.
I didn't know the storey, I simply put LPGA and NFL in the search and there are only six results, so, easy peasy. :)
Jay Cantrell posted a couple of Blog entries on 7 Oct 2016 on why authors leave SOL, this included the sentence "The man who posted under the name Brendan Buckley is a nationally syndicated columnist." (and being one of those who left).
So I looked his two stories up. One is excellent, and people have looked for it here several times. Nobody has asked after the other one, at least not that I have noticed.
And his mom did die, and his girlfriend became a drug addict although I can't remember if she became a stripper or not.
Since you seem to know, and I don't really care. Did Jay mean that authors were leaving SoL because a nationally syndicated columnist was also posting stories, or did he mean that an author posting here subsequently became a nationally syndicated columnist so other authors left..??
The first reason seems childishly petty, the second is more like a case of overinflated ego.
If however your quote from Jay was meant to mean that for reasons you didn't state, various authors left, one of whom was a nationally syndicated columnist, then, well, so what..?? Maybe an author on SoL is RR Martin, Emily Watson or the pope, so what..?? Their motives for joining, posting or indeed leaving are their own, but not something that I or probably most other authors give an aeronautical copulation about.
Posting https://storiesonline.net/ablog/Jay_Cantrell/12 works better than summarising it. Any number of authors then put up blog entries basically saying "Hear hear" (for those who could spell) or "Here here" (ho hum). Since there's no way of saying "show me the blog entries for date xxx" I have no idea who they were.
Thank you for the link. Reading the initial post/rant and the two that follow pretty much covers it. The core is probably contained in the following;
Some, like my friend, Brendan Buckley, and the great dotB, have no plans to return regardless of the encouragement from the vast majority of SOL readers. Others have pulled stories to clean them up and then decided to put them elsewhere.
Some were from people that enjoy what SOL offers (and who recognize the scope of the site). They frequently mention the sorts of feedback they provide and have asked if I thought they were being too harsh to the writer.
A few were from newcomers to the site that have posted one or two stories, gotten flamed, and are wondering if it is worthwhile to continue to share their imagination and creativity with the masses.
To point out the obvious, any author can turn off the readers ability to respond.
In a perfect world there would still be '1 bombs', there would still be ungrateful readers and grammar nazis intent on venting their spleen. Why would that still occur in a perfect world? Because unless that world is devoid of humans and human nature, there will always be such people.
A baby who faceplants the carpet might get up and try again, or might be surrounded by anxious parents and be comforted and perhaps encouraged to try again, some learn to walk only as a way to start running, a few run without learning how to walk properly. Authors are people, authors start to write for whatever reason, many post somewhere, some will post regardless of the responses they receive, others need good feedback as motivation, egos grow, some get bruised, some throw their toys from their prams. It's not good or bad, it's human nature.
Darwin was right, it is survival of the fittest, but folk forget that you can be physically weak and mentally strong. An author might post only mediocre stories, receive more than their share of 1 bombs and grammar nazi attacks, yet have the fortitude or motivation to continue regardless. Then again, a gifted writer might quit because their latest story was roasted in flames and submerged by 1 bombs.
It is not a fault of the site, the moderators or the general readership, it is human nature at work.
I dislike the scoring system because it isn't honest. No matter the reasons for it, the bottom line is that it gives false results, 'weighted' is another word for dishonest. If the stories I posted only received 1's, so be it, I don't want or need the results tampered with. But some authors NEED that same dishonesty to make them feel better, even if it means that high scoring authors have their scores dragged down to appease the egos of others. (Note I'm not suggesting it be changed, I'm positive that Lazeez is sick of it and has NO desire to change it.)
We live in a world that is almost completely dependant on computers, most people are at least aware of the term 'computer virus', many know they need to update often, get anti-virus software, strong, frequently changed passwords and the intelligence not to open unknown attachments, do all that and they are safe. (Or just buy a mac :). So, with that understanding of computer viruses, look around now. California beaches heaving with people, gun shops declared 'essential', Sweden deciding on NO restrictions. All that whilst there is no anti-virus 'shot', no cure. Show people the way the virus spreads, explain the necessary steps to stop it spreading, fill the news with daily death-counts. Result..?? Most stay home, some protest at the 'conspiracy', some just ignore all advice, some honestly believe it is their gods punishment on the 'sinners' so they themselves are safe.
Human nature. It applies to authors on SoL being criticised just as much as to the human race faced with a pandemic virus.
Anyone want a slightly used soapbox...?
Anyone want a slightly used soapbox...?
Just leave it. I'm sure that like at Hyde Square [where the original soapbox started] someone else will be along and want to use it.
someone else will be along and want to use it.
If we had enough of them, and a nice steep hill, we could start a derby.
Hyde Square [where the original soapbox started]
Hyde Square..?? Not sure such a place exists. Hyde Park Square is a place, but though close to speakers corner it is outside Hyde Park, north of Marble Arch, whilst speakers corner is just south of the Arch.
(Soap box to pedantry in a single bound :)
Hyde Square?
Try Hyde Park, around 100 yards from Marble Arch Underground. I've wandered through there a couple times - decades ago - and remember a few kooks exercising their legal right to spout garbage. It's rather irrelevant now, the Internet has rendered it obsolete.
Will ecuuuse me! I do notice that you both knew what I was talking about though. :-)
Seriously, now that I have been corrected I do recognize that Hyde Park is what I was trying to identify. I have always associated 'soapbox' with Hyde Park, but don't think I remembered that the actual location was just outside of Hyde Park itself.
