The "Writer's" Group - Except You Can't Actually Talk About Writing. · 3:32pm Feb 20th, 2015
So two days back, I started a topic about common writing misconceptions. Then a freak snowstorm kept me offline, and I'm only able to get online today only to find... the topic is locked.
That shocked me. It broke no rules (that I know of) and unlike BWI, it remained civil until the lock.
The actual statement by admin ThatOneWriter reads as follows:
I'm sorry, but this is just too bloggy to stay. Frankly, I should have locked your last one, but I saw a lot of comments, so I left it. That got out of hand, so I won't be repeating that mistake.
As a general rule of thumb, if a thread post requires a TL;DR warning or takes up most or all of the screen, it's best to re-evaluate if everything mentioned actually needs to be said. Past the one-screen point, you're probably stifling any responses, since people are going to get bored or annoyed by all the text they have to read just to understand your point.
Locked.
I already sent him a PM about this, but I might as well blog here, because in general The Writer's Group is a wreck.
Most of TWG's rules and policies are de facto anti-conducive the the very thing the group is for. Someone else's topic was locked for being about him wanting to know which of his ideas sounded the most interesting, and the rules also say you can't do "idea development threads." Wait, what? Half of writing IS ideas, and often outside input is needed to develop them. TV writers for example often discuss things among themselves until they've worked out all the kinks before they start scripting, after all. They don't just sit down and write and hope it all works out.
But no, on TWG you can't discuss ideas with people or ask for input in working out the kinks, so its completely useless for that.
What's funny is that you CAN discuss the latest episode of MLP and whether or not Flash Sentry is a Gary Stu, even though neither has anything to do with writing. Funny, that.
But okay, focusing specifically on my topic, let's take ThatOneWriter's points in order:
The first is his excuse that the BWI topic got out of hand so he's going to assume this one will too.
I want to point out one thing: It was actually a mod who cast the first stone in BWI. Just look. What's the post number? #2--meaning it was the very first response I got. And its to an XKCD comic which had nothing to do with the post. And yet people saw it, and it colored their perception, and eventually led to the row the topic became, since that perception is basically the problem people had with it. So, great--management blaming the users for the management's mistakes!
Secondly, even if you take the stance that it would've happened anyway.... well yeah, part of diversity and having different opinions is that people may disagree, and disagree strongly. The management's position should be exclusively to step in AFTER something has happened, not to try and pre-empt it. I've been on forums before that took that route, and they all went the same way: After awhile, people got tense because they didn't know what was legal or not. Besides that, trying to create a hugbox only leads to passive-aggressiveness and seething anger that is going to blow up anyway, whereas places that allow very vocal rows tend to (ironically) be overall more peaceful.
And, yeah--by taking his stance he's basically saying no view on writing is allowed that people aren't garaunteed to agree with 100% anyway, so now we have a "Writer's Group" where nobody can discuss ideas or even discuss... writing. Except for telling people only what they know, which only ensures they'll never learn anything new and never get any better. Thus making the group entirely pointless. Might as well hire Bobby Fischer to teach your kid how to play Chess, but then tell him he's not allowed to teach the kid any techniques or strategies the kid doesn't already know. If that sounds like a clusterfrag of logic, its because it is--it's the exact kind of "thinking" you would expect from administration who aren't thinking, only reacting with no consideration for what message they're sending.
I mean hey, America allowed multiple cultures onto its land. And that led to gang wars, drug deals, that whole civil rights thing by that Martin Luther King Jr. guy... hey, it causes so many problems, we ought to just ship those people back to their homelands and have America be all-white! Right? Or you could also compare it to the liberal mentality of "no guns means no shootings" which demonstrably doesn't work in real life.
ThatOneWriter's next point basically amounts to "posts shouldn't be too long."
Guess what? WRITING ENTAILS READING. You don't read, you can't write. PERIOD. People who whine about long posts are people who frankly, shouldn't be on the internet where 99% of the communication is text. They should exit themselves from all forums and go back to watching Michael Bay movies, which would be more their speed, and then the rest of us wouldn't have to deal with small-minded lazy brats with entitlement attitudes.
Quite frankly I don't understand why modern society seems to think that the people who are ahead should dumb themselves down for the sake of those who can't keep up. If I were rich, would you demand I give all my money to the people around me so we'd all be on a level playing field? If I were making passing grades in school, would you automatically raise everyone else's grade so we could all pass together? Actually, the latter was the basis of the No Child Left Behind act, which is almost universally considered a disaster. As a long time video gamer, this reminds me of those years of spoiled brats complaining about games being "too hard," which leads to games today holding you by the hand and telling you how to do everything and not even letting you fail, and which basically aren't even fun except in multiplayer mode, which is the reason that's 99% of what everyone now plays.
To put it another way: imagine you're dueling Pokemon and a kid says all he has is a Pidgey, so all anyone else can use is Pidgeys too. Would you A) cater to his attitude or B) tell him to go catch and train more 'mons and come back when he can put up a real challenge?
Just, seriously, think about evolution: Einstein didn't disavow his theory because drunk joe next door couldn't understand it, and people didn't stop using computers just because a few rustics thought they were evil satan devices. So why should I write shorter posts just because one or two people can't help but post "TLDR" images? I shouldn't. That's just fucking INSANE.
But hey, maybe ThatOneWriter wants to cater to anti-intellectual illiterate manchildren with entitlement attitudes. As the saying goes, "its your mess, you clean it up."
The ideas are good mate, but you need a bit more concision I think.
I tried to read through what you posted, it came off a bit heavyhanded in the "NO THIS WAY" and it read as a heavy bit of rant.
I agree with what you're slinging down, but not the way you're doing it.
It's like serving a steak by tossing it overhand onto someone's face. Might be a steak, but that won't cover the medical bills for the severe burns.
I'm one of The Writer's Group admins, so let me explain dear ThatOneWriter decision to lock your thread. If you have any further questions, feel free to PM me anything.
Yes, while half of writing are ideas, please be mindful of the group's number of members. We have 5.4k (and counting) with new writers with fresh ideas that want to tell their story. This is why we do not allow self-promotion. Also, if we had them create threads that centralize around their stories, they're going to mostly be "Is _____ better or ______?" Many writers have dilemmas in which path to take. While we do encourage thread participation, if we have too many threads that are bloggy, it will be unproductive and just a cluster of mess.
You may be saying, "How so?" How so? Well, let me put it short and simple. If the liberty to use the Writer's Group forum enables a user to make a thread about a long idea and compare it to another, that arises another problem. Its length. Like what ThatOneWriter mentioned, it's for the best to make the thread short as possible. From questions to tips, the shorter the better. However, like I said, this excludes the "Is _____ better or ______?"
Discussing ideas with others are good. However, discussing it with people you're working with is a more viable option rather than a forum.
Rules need to be put in place so threads do not go out of hand. We encourage the discussion of writing. Simply get straight to the point or to the questions. Adding extra stuff is not needed most of the time. With these rules, we hope these discussions would always dictate towards writing and My Little Pony.
And get a whole bunch of "tl;dr"s? That would be rather unproductive, wouldn't you agree? Besides, reading the writing of a book is much better than words on a forum. Be mindful of a person's attention span. Humans beings like to right to the point and lay it all out. And if writing requires reading, would people find use out of this you wrote?:
People don't want to read a novel in a thread. They just want information quick to the point. Yes, the internet is communication. But a War and Peace's length of why x is better than y is just redundant.
We have to enforce rules to keep the group going and to be functional.
So should we not put rules down just because a few people don't like how it works? That's insane as well. We could say the same. Hopefully, these points answered you. If you still have questions, please send them my way.
Thanks.
2815033 Here's the thing though:
The people who think the posts are too long--nobody is forcing them to read a god damned thing. They can back out if they want to, they can read something else. They have choice.
I said something like this to ThatOneWriter: As of now, they don't have equal rights, they have BETTER rights. Because now they can read any post they want, but now I have to write a post that may suit their tastes even if I or other people would prefer something else, or indeed even if its detrimental to whatever point I'm trying to make.
(I forgot to mention also that the length thing was a tacked-on excuse. As it stands, topics can be locked just because the admins don't approve, even if the topic is one that has 100% approval, is one line long, cures cancer, and spontaneously brings Twilight Sparkle into existence)
And the dialogue between me and the cat was meant to make it entertaining. I don't see people saying it didn't work.
2815232
Here's the thing though:
We need to make rules and enforce them so the forum becomes functional. If you don't like the rules, then tough luck. Sure, it'll be fun with sunshine, rainbows, and butterfly farts, but this isn't the case. Rules are rules and we need to enforce them.
Some posts you post in the forum feels very much like a blog. But rules are rules, y'know?
This whole blog can be summed up right here.
And you claim I'm irrational.
2818680 And you just proved my point, again.
"See? I can quote this part out of context, that proves you're nuts! Somehow."
2818751
i.imgur.com/himZD0M.gif
2818817 And now yer resorting to gifs. Whassa matter troll-girl, out of things to say?
2818845
No, but you clearly have gone dry. I've grown tired of this. And seeing you blow up because you got butthurt that your thread was locked tells me that I have been wasting my breath on you.
2818857 You're so delusional it's almost kind of cute.
Lessee now:
1) you came to MY blog... which I certainly did not tell you about, meaning you must've went looking for it.
2) nobody forced you to post here, so any responses you got were a direct consequence of your own actions
3) and then you moved to a different topic to stir the pot some more
and yet here you are pulling the "I'm tired of this" card and trying to act superior (and dare I say, even smug
)
Again, it's kinda cute. Like a little doggee who keeps yapping at you, and you throw it some treats, and it eats them then yaps some more. Yap, little puppy, yap!
2818867
Goodbye.