"How Can We Improve The Quality of Fanworks" - Video · 3:36pm Jun 1st, 2014
I saw this linked on EQD, but in case you missed it, take a look:
I think they capture the complexities of the argument very well. However, I think they miss the "If you can't say anything nice..." issue that I struggle with. When I read a fic that isn't very good, I tend to just leave it by the wayside. I don't comment, I don't click thumbs down, and I try to forget it as quickly as possible. My actions come from a place of empathy, knowing that if I criticize a work, it's going to sting. Like they brought up, though, there is such a thing as destructive positive feedback.
Personally, I need to trust myself more when it comes to criticism. I know I've essentially failed the authors of these poor-quality fics by not being honest, and there have been several occasions when I've thought of something constructive to post only to hold it to myself for fear that my observations were invalid. It's not being mean to give honest, constructive feedback.
When I get a thumbs-down with no comments, it drives me nuts. If you see some thing you don't like, tell me what I'm doing wrong. If you read something that you DO like, then still tell me what I'm doing wrong. I want to improve, and I'm only going to do so by hearing what you really think.
Peace.
i really get the dichotomy that's you're commenting on here. the way i see it is looking at the scope of the work. the ratio of good to bad in any work tells you what level of criticism you should be giving. therefore, if you always give the same amount of criticism as you give praise, you will always give the right kind of critique.
example, a very weak work, you don't have time to get into the meta-analysis of any character motivations because you're remarking on the syntax, but they did do a silly in paragraph four that caught your eye, you've given them the kind of critique that can help them grow, not only into a better writer, but more the kind of writer that they are going to be, the kind that is "meh syntax whatever, the reader will sort it out, but dag gummin if i ain't pullin' a silly every five words" congrats the world has another improv comedian.
on the other hand, you pick someone's work apart with continuity, because it's honestly the only thing you can find wrong, and then you remark on the excellent word choice and narrative flow. you've once again found the next best step for the writer, while reinforcing their strengths.
really this style is just a short hand that informs you of two things 1) how to find the simplest problem with a work 2) how to be kinder to the new kids, and only give harsh reviews to M A Larson... er, i mean more experienced writers who have the chops to take some criticism.