Forum: Editors/Reviewers Hangout

I don't know if I was wrong in my approach or if the authors request for feedback was insincere.

Impossible to judge without knowing the totality of the circumstances.

I got a decidedly negative response from an author when I suggested that he review a particular paragraph in his story.

That's happened to me so many times. I finally stopped giving that kind of feedback.

Many authors don't want feedback. They want to be told how great a job they did. Or to point out a typo. But when you get to the actual writing, most don't want to hear it.

That's happened to me so many times. I finally stopped giving that kind of feedback.

It's tricky territory. As we've discussed, different authors abandon stories at different points in their lifecycles. Some want nothing to do with a story after they finish it (long before it's posted), while others are still trying to refine and clean it up. Many others, like me, quit 'fixing' their stories when the temptation to rewrite them gets too overwhelming. And many simply dislike feedback in general. If it's not overflowing with gratitude, they don't want to hear it.

Instead, I feel the author out. I'll write about how the story impacted me, telling them what I liked about it, and then I'll mention an issue I think might need work at the end of my message. Then I drop it.

If they ask about it, I'll also mention a couple other issues. If then respond to those, THEN I'll tell them what I really think of it, and I'll mark them as being receptive to feedback and suggestions.

It makes responding to authors more difficult, but it's part of the author/reader game. Authors are, in general, solitary reclusives. They may enjoy partying, but when they sit down to write, then generally lock themselves away so they aren't distracted. (Yes, Ernest and Switch, I know that gross oversimplification doesn't apply to you, but I think it's true for many authors, or else they'd have trouble spending so much time writing.)

Garymrssn, I guess I need to add a "Editorial critiques welcomed and encouraged!" to my end-of-story comments.

Given that many authors request reader input of this nature, how should the reader approach the author with his/her suggestions/corrections?

A lot depends on how they request the feedback! Some authors ask, and expect, you to tell them about writing errors while others only want or expect more broad comments. If the author thinks feedback is a comment about what they liked or didn't like, that's different to an author asking or expecting to be told of typos or wording issues.

who helped co-author one of the Damsel in Distress novels by The Scott, and also collaborated on other stories with him.

Although I've helped The Scot with editing on What the ?, I only co-authored Shiloh with him, but did a lot of co-authoring with Cazna's stories (the action scenes and the revisions) while he was still active.

I've edited and acted as a sounding board for others, but am trying to stop doing editing for others to work on my own stories.

Forum he discussed what he did, changing point of view, cutting roughly 20% of excess verbiage, and doing a great deal more than a mere editor could get away with.

The situation with Shiloh wasn't a normal co-author one. The Scot had some serious real life issues and was dumping the story; he asked for someone to take it over. I offered and was given a free hand. There were some serious issues with the first 25 chapters as they stood and to do a good revision of them I changed it from past tense to present tense and cut a lot of the excess description out, then went on to write the rest of the story from the scene where the aliens first appear at Crossroads. When I had it finished I worked with The Scot to review and further revise the first 30 chapters, and he wasn't able to work on it again. So I got my regular editors to go over it and posted it.

Since then my contact with The Scot has varied with his work and life situation - very changed. He had finished What the ? which I edited and pointed out a couple of issues I thought he needed to revisit and he was working on that when I last had contact - about Easter time.

I don't believe editors should ever change text to make the story better, and should only make changes to make the story clearer or easier to read. Even then, only when they understand the author's intent and style.

As an author, I appreciate both editors and proofreaders. Anyone who wants to help the story is welcome. If you can make the story better by rephrasing something, then please, do. However, this is generally something the author/editor/proofreader work out between themselves. For every author like me, there are those who refuse to change anything. For me, if a change doesn't fit the story, I'll rephrase it to make it fit. What's more, seeing different interpretations opens doors rather than closing them. You can walk through any you want, but if you don't like one entrance, you can continue along your original path.

I proof for one author who says 'just make the changes and send it back to me' in text format. I am a little nervous doing it that way.

Zom, don't take it too seriously. If I'm not sure about changes, I'll run the edited document through "Compare", which converts two text documents into a "Review" document.

Note: Say your later comment. Many authors don't want to be bothered with details. They just want a finished document, while others want to use the opportunity to learn.

Assuming your writer is also using a Word compatible program why not put your changes in (say) red?

richardshagrin, color coding is a bad choice, as it's easy is miss a color coded comma. Doing a "Compare"/"Combine" is more efficient, as you won't miss any of the edits. Ernest, the same is true if the original "Review" edits didn't transfer.

The other nice thing about Word and its derivatives is the ability to insert comments

Just about every word processor out there does that, and most of them aren't Word derivatives.

I use Open Office and my proofreader and I use the track changes function to track edits + he inserts the occasional comment in the margin.

Just about every word processor out there does that, and most of them aren't Word derivatives.

The first modern word processor software was Word Perfect by Corel and the others copied the capabilities it offered, even Microsoft Word which was released 3 years later copied the most of the services Word Perfect had, but not all of them, and not as well. All MS Word had going for it was it was about a quarter of the price of Word perfect at that time.

Assuming your writer is also using a Word compatible program why not put your changes in (say) red? He can then see what you have done and use the global instruction to change colour of the entire file to black again or change your changes.

That's exactly how one of my editors works. He started doing it because he uses MS Word 2007 and I use Libre Office and the non-standard code used in MS Word doesn't always cross the conversion barrier; the Changes and Revisions codes is especially susceptible to losing data. The problem occurs when he saves it as .odt to send back to me and there are also some errors when he sends it to me as .docx or .doc and I convert it. Thus the red text for the changes stands out I can easily copy them into the master file.

That's exactly how one of my editors works. He started doing it because he uses MS Word 2007 and I use Libre Office and the non-standard code used in MS Word doesn't always cross the conversion barrier

Libre Office is free. You can't talk your editor into downloading a copy to use for editing your stories?

Libre Office is free. You can't talk your editor into downloading a copy to use for editing your stories?

He's too wedded to MS Office to even think about using anything else. Add in it took him a long time to learn how to use the MS Ribbon, and he doesn't want to learn how to use anything else.

I can't wait for him to have to get a new computer and he finds out his MS Office 2007 won't work properly on the new version of MS Windows the system will have - whatever it is.

Sounds like Win 8 and or Win 10 is going to end up being a huge shock for him.

Ayep, it will be and I don't think he'll like it. But while he can keep his current system going, he will, so they may be up to Win 11 or Win 12 by then.

Actually, Office 2007 does work on Windows 10 (I recently set it up for my mother on her new system), so you're probably going to have a bit of a wait ahead of you.

According to my brother Office 2007 doesn't work in Win 10. But, then it may be a case of what version of Win 10. At the Family History Centre they have Win 7 Enterprise on 3 systems and Win 7 Pro on another unit. While some of the older CD based software will run on the Win 7 Ent machines none of it will run on the Win 7 Pro system. This is due to the Win 7 Ent version having extra software in it to allow it to simulate running Win XP while the Win 7 Pro version doesn't. The same is probably true of Win 10.

P.S. I restored Win 7 because Win 10 crashed a minimum of once a day.

Not to revive the flame wars, but ...

Everyone I know who tried Windows 10 reverted except for:
o one guy who actually appreciated it
o the dozens who were enticed to try it for free after being told they could return to their old system, and were then unable to, and lost both their installed software and much of their data, because M$ knew there was no physical way to peel Win 10 off of an upgrade install.

Win 10 is supposedly more secure, but few I know trust it, as most suspect M$ will soon switch to a monthly subscription service.

At least once so bad that the hard drive had to be reformatted and the new version of windows installed from OEM media.

For about a decade now the only time I run Windows on a computer is on a very old system for playing old Win 98 games or in Virtual Box on a Linux system. No problems with the operation that way, and definitely no data lost because it all saves to the Linux system..

For about a decade now the only time I run Windows on a computer is on a very old system for playing old Win 98 games or in Virtual Box on a Linux system. No problems with the operation that way, and definitely no data lost because it all saves to the Linux system.

Isn't it sad, with all the fancy new game systems, when many of us return to decades old games (I have an old favorite, Escape Velocity Nova, that I can't surrender, despite having mastered multiple times over. It's all sprite graphics, and while simplistic, is more open-ended, rather than a strict 'play by the rules' game play. The new games all insist you invest 40 to 60 hours in uninterrupted game play (few legit break points) that require you to solve one puzzle after another in a very strict hierarchy. Bleh! Who needs to be told 'how' to play?

Isn't it sad, with all the fancy new game systems, when many of us return to decades old games

I've a few reasons for preferring the older games to the new ones.

1. The majority of the new games in the last 10 to 15 years require you to play on-line with no off-line version. Since I have to pay for every MB of upload and download that costs a heck of a lot to play on-line.

1.a. Most of the games require you to fork out A$50 to A$100 for the disc set then pay a monthly subscription to keep your character 'alive' in the on-line database. I don't agree with that process.

2. Despite most of the game developers using Linux system to develop their games and to run the server versions of the game the rarely sell a user version that runs on Linux.

3. Most of the games made in the last 10 years require the use of the latest version (as at time of release) of DirectX which means you also need the latest version of Windows because not all versions of DirectX will run on all versions of Windows.

4. Many of the latest games won't play well unless you have the latest or next to latest hardware for when they were released or last updated.
..............

Even the latest versions of my favourite games are of the style that come under points 1 and 2, so I don't bother with them.

a 2010 study of FanFiction.net's database found that among their readers, of those who included age in their profile, 80% were between 13 and 17

That profile fits wattpad, not SOL. Fanfic is more prevalent on wattpad than SOL so that makes sense.

Dicrostonyx, that's a decent approach (to contacting authors) and is essentially what I've espoused (I tend to suggest a couple suggestion, and if they seem receptive I'll send more).

As far as author/editor communications, flagging a passage makes sense, but sometimes an editor might rephrase a short (sentence) segment which helps pop what I'm trying to express. So I'm appreciative when that happens. It often helps to see a story from a different perspective.

By the way, don't get me started on working across multiple devices on a MAC.

For decades I've claimed Macs were better systems than any PC with Windows loaded on it (even when making money as a Windows fix it guy), the only thing I've every had against them is the price. Mind you, for what you get it's a good price provided you want everything that's on it. For the average user who will only use about a third of the capabilities it's overpriced. For a fraction of what you pay for a Mac I can get a standard PC and load it with Unix or Linux to have the same quality of performance and reliability at a lower price and a higher level or interoperation with other hardware. Also, It will only have the software you want to use.

The issue with Word for Mac is more likely to do with the extra code added by MS to get it to work on a Mac as against working with Windows.

As to the multiple windows open, I do that in Linux all the time. Mind you, the Mac OS is a slightly altered variation of Unix which is what Linux is based off, so I fully expect you to have that capability on a Mac.

for reasons I will never comprehend prefers using MS Publisher

I'd be willing to bet that was the only application she was taught how to use well and now stays using what she knows. In short, staying in her comfort zone which is where most people tend to work.

Apple were the tops for graphics but, as well as price, their problem was the shortage of software. DOS and Windows were open source so everyone and his brother wrote programs for them, many of which were (and are) free of charge LINUX should have been a worthy alternative but *seems* to need a computer guru to use

Over the years my experience with computers and operating systems seems to be very different to yours.

Apple systems were always good hardware and software, but after the Apple IIe and they moved to the iMac everything was sold fully loaded with every sort of software you could possibly want already on it. If you wanted a system with all that software it was a damn good deal. However, most people only used between 20% to 50% of the software on it, thus it was overpriced to hell. For example, not everyone wanted, or used, top notch graphics manipulation software, but it was on the system by default.

DOS and Windows were never open source. DOS and Windows up to Win 3.11, along with the basic application software, were a lot cheaper than the alternatives. But they were always proprietary software. Win the introduction of Win 95 and the MS Office Suite the prices for them ramp up very quickly, but, by then, they had a strangle hold on the business market.

Unix, which is what the MacOS and Linux is based on and what Microsoft has been trying to come up to for quality, performance, and security is the other major player with Linux being the Open Source option. Part of the problem with Unix and Linux is they do not have the money to pressure people into writing software for them the way Microsoft and Apple do, thus they are often a bit behind in some software applications. However, for 98% of home or business needs they have suitable software to do anything you want.

Linux and most versions of Unix were a bit behind the rest in introducing run and forget style installation systems for their OS, but they've had them for about fifteen years now. You don't need to be a Unix or Linux guru any more than you need to be a Windows guru, in fact in recent years it's been becoming harder and harder for the average user to do anything behind the scenes in Windows, and easier in Linux and Unix.

Now the iPhone and iPads etc are totally different things to the Macs. The Mac is intended as a business workhorse while the other is intended as a home toy.

. (Each time I open a file, I've got to start with "All my documents" and drill down to where I'm interested in. Grr!

That happens on my Windows 7 system. Not with Excel, but with Word.

You find that in Apple -> System Preferences... -> General Panel

Thanks, Lazeez, but I find the "Most Recent" doesn't help much, as it won't affect where to look for new files, and the 'default' controls which folder to always default to, rather than which one you want to open at the moment (which makes saving something to a USB device difficult).

I really like the PC version of WORD's "Recent Documents" page, which not only lists the most recent documents, but you favorite folders (I reserve one for each active story). The biggest problem with this (for my use) is that the Mac is trying to fit cloud storage onto a non-file system (i.e. one where you're not supposed to be aware of a file system), and it produces a cludgy mismatch of functionality.

But then, I'm still figuring out how to work within the Mac. (My mistake for using the wrong name, I was afraid "Mac" looked like someone's name rather than a corporate trademark. However, I didn't use their corporate trademark when I did.)

A quick tip, in the Finder, find the folder where you save your stories, and drag it to the left hand side of the Finder's window to the side bar. After that, that folder will appear on the left hand side of the 'Open/Save' dialog box in all Applications including MS Word for quick access.

Thanks, Lazeez. You were right, no one ever mentioned that to me before. However, my main issue is with features in MS WORD for PCs which don't work under the Mac. The most obvious, is the PC version has a "Recent documents" page (instead of a simple drop down list), where it lists each of your recent files, along with all of your recent directories, and you can pin items to either list. That makes it incredibly easy to access documents, even if you work on a new one each day. My biggest frustration with the Mac's file system, is I can't differentiate between identical folders on a USB drive, an external drive, cloud storage, or my HD. They're all listed the same, and only some of them point back to where they came from.

Growing pains, I guess. I really should have had Apple walk me though the process. Instead, while deciding while to make the investment, I 'rented' a Mac online, paying for a set number of hours, and got used to using each of the applications. However, there's a difference between 'using' an application for a couple hours, and using it for six or eight hours a day.

Pinning the folders to my favorites bar helps.

Oh, and my system is new, using El Capitan v10.11.2. The problem with the help menu, is that all the common references to how to access features have changed, making it useless requesting system help files.

@Switch

Let's say I'm working on a story. In my Most Rrecent is Chap 1, Chap 2, and story-notes.

When I open Word, I click on Chap 2 in my Most Recent. It loads the file. Then I want to check something in Chap 1. When I click on "open" it doesn't bring up the Most Recent list. I have to go through what you said -- after clicking on "open," I follow the folder paths until I get to the file.

I hate belaboring the point (of my unfamiliarity with the OS), but it's even worse than that. Instead of pointing to the most recent folder, it always points to the MS WORD folder (which I never use). If I try to open a folder, I have to start with the desktop and work my way down each time (though Lazeez's suggestion fixes that problem). Instead, I've been ignoring WORD's "Open" command and instead going to my already open Finder windows to open all my files there, but even then, if I have the same folder opened on a couple different devices, I can't tell them apart (having been burned before, I like backing up immediately after I finish a chapter).

Again, these are merely learning frustrations. Once I get used to it, I'll be fine. (Although, I read up on everyone's frustration with the lack on consistent WORD features across their product line before purchasing the machine or installing the software, so I was prewarned.)

but I find the "Most Recent" doesn't help much, as it won't affect where to look for new files,

As I said, I have the same problem with Word on Windows 7. Not Excel though.

In Word...

Let's say I'm working on a story. In my Most Rrecent is Chap 1, Chap 2, and story-notes.

When I open Word, I click on Chap 2 in my Most Recent. It loads the file. Then I want to check something in Chap 1. When I click on "open" it doesn't bring up the Most Recent list. I have to go through what you said -- after clicking on "open," I follow the folder paths until I get to the file.

Now, let's say I wanted to check something in the story-notes file. This time it's pointing to the correct folder. It remembers where it found Chap 1.

The problem has to do with getting to the file from the most recent list. Unlike Excel, Word doesn't set it to the folder the file came from. But if you go directly to the folder, it remembers.

every time you try to open a file, it defaults to the MS WORD folder.

Standard MS Word behaviour. You need to find the correct setting within Word to reset that to where you want it. Probably in what passes for the old Tools settings. You may even have to make an entry change to your WIN.INI file to point it to the file path you want.