The support means the world to me, and thanks to your kind contributions I was able to go and visit my boy in Britain. I'll try and mock up a proper recap blog—though I am notoriously terrible at doing those, I don't think I've ever managed a proper recap blog for any of the various conventions I've gone to over the years. I guess there was
Aug
13th
2015
Rejected From Equestria Daily Volume 7000 · 4:43am Aug 13th, 2015
So after about a year and a half of not submitting anything to EqD because I figured I didn't need their validation, I decided to submit another story because I've improved vastly in this period of time. I just now received an email which told me that my fic "Sail To The Moon" was rejected for the following reasons
1. being a story that was told too many times already
2. not anticipating the tantibus
So let me get this straight
I'm not allowed to be published because I can't tell the future and my story is 1000 percent original
and because I can't TELL THE GOD DAMN FUTURE
glad to see that EqD hasn't changed a single fucking bit
What the fuck does that even mean? I think you need to march down to Present Perfect's office and demand and explanation.
Yup.
This is why I tell some authors who fret over it to stop. EqD is an elitists guild who, at best, use a shaky set of guidelines and quite a few pre-readers who only rate based on their personal opinion and not any quantitative methods.
EqD is good for Pony news and nothing more.
EqD.
EqD never changes.
And this is why we do not care about EqG. That, or maybe the tantibus has you in its grip and it's trying to tell you.
Let's face it, it's a shit site regardless.
3316262 To be honest, when I read that line, I thought it was a joke at first. Tell me that DOESN'T sound like some bullshit MLG crowd saying. Then again, I've heard EQD is more or less the self-praising, egotistical MLG type side of the fandom.
2018 and still not being able to see the future, Regi? I'm disappointed.
You fucking disgrace, can't even predict something from a few months in the future. God, what are you, mortal?
3316310 They have a nice article about EQD on encyclopedia dramatica
https://encyclopediadramatica.se/index.php?title=Equestria_Daily&redirect=no
Amazing. Not in a good way.
What the hell? This is the strangest thing from EqD I've heard.
And these kinds of stories are why, when a reader of mine says "Hey, you should submit this story to EqD." my response is "Haha… no!"
3316316 Well, I dislike EQD, but I dislike them using "fagot" as everything second words or noun even more.
Regi pls.
I can read the entire response. I know you got more than two reasons. And you didn't even get a strike!
Also, "tantibus" is Latin for "nightmare" so it probably makes sense in the context of your story, which at a glance looks Luna based.
3316359 this story was published in March. Three months before the tantibus ever showed up. If the prereader gave half a shit they wouldn't have made any mention to this at all.
3316367
Perhaps it was mentioned in more of a "Huh, maybe you predicted it with this story" rather than "you should have predicted this coming." That'd be just absurd, and not something I would ever assume this PR of doing. The way the e-mail reads, it seems like more of a passing comment than an actual rejection reason.
The main issues come from editing and an apparently lukewarm ending.
3316373
This CLEARLY states that they think this story clashes with the idea of the tantibus. I don't know how you could ever think this was a "passing comment" when it's literally 1/3 of the review.
What the fuck is a Tantibus? Sounds like a misspelled hentei title for a bus filled with tentacles.
I've never submitted my stories to EQD... I wonder if I could throw one down 8D
SCREW THE POPO!
I'm hungry.
3316410
Dream flagellation. Luna's revealed to be a maso. They stop it with
something like that.
Reggy, why the fuck do you even care about what the Egalitarian Dicksuckers have to say? Nobody even reads that drivel anymore, since they finally figured out it's just one pathetic little man's shrine to Trixie.
What exactly is EqD?
3316427
A couple of people with too much time on their hands, and too many penises in them.
3316414 Well... that confused me... vastly...
I'll accept this, and move on.
LET'S BURN DOWN SOMETHING!
Neither of those have anything to do with how well the story is written
> Thinking that Eq-fucking-D will ever change.
i.imgur.com/tz7lb4A.gif
(Love you homes. <3)
Without wishing to seem rude, if you dislike EQD so much, why did you submit your story? I can understand hating the site, but why would you want to be associated with it then? Would it not be better to just avoid us?
3316990
The urge to try, Ferret, and perhaps a [not-so] subconscious desire for validation...
------------
Regi, they bitched me out for using violence in a fic about war. The fact that this post exists shows they're EVEN WORSE.
This is quite a different point you're making than what you said in the OP. So which is it? In the absence of any reason not to do so, pre-readers are going to assume your story is current with canon. If not, then say so, because in this case, the story actually does have a difficult time working with how the tantibus is presented. Many authors state that their story takes place before some canon development.
That said, it's also another story about Luna getting angsty with Celestia about her time as Nightmare Moon, so it needs to stand out from the crowd by being clearly higher quality or taking a unique angle, which it doesn't. And when the biggest point overall is "you need editing help," which I see you've conveniently failed to mention here, how the story relates to the tantibus is well down the list of problems. It'd also be something easy to explain, for which the review made some suggestions, so... what exactly are you mad about again? That we gave you reasons for rejecting the story? That we offered help on correcting those problems?
You know quite a few people with long-established reputations as good reviewers, folks like Burraku_Pansa and Prak. Why don't you have one of them look at it to see what they say? I'm betting they'd find the same issues.
I'll even help you work on it toward getting it posted, if you like, Y'know, me being an EqD asshole and all.
Regi, I love you, but you need to hold back on the salt
3317130 Actually, the "you need this edited" part of the review was more of a passing comment than the tantibus comment. it was something along the lines of "Try and find someone who knows old english grammar". In addition, the "This story had already been told 'too many times'" is very vague and actually quite rude and condescending, as it just sort of dismisses the story without any thought and isn't exactly a valid reason to flunk a story. But both of those things were mentioned in one sentence of the review, while my failure to anticipate the tantibus went on for about six.
3316990 there are still people who get their fics they read from EqD, and actually passing through the ridiculous arbitrary hoops required to make it on EqD is also and achievement on its own right. I believed that in over a year and a half the quality of my stories had improved to such a point that I could pass through these hoops; clearly not.
3317202 said the pot to the kettle
3317215
I can understand it's frustrating to improve and still be told you're not good enough, but why not do as Pasco suggested and get some editing help? You know several great authors who surely would be amenable to lending a limb.
The email didn't say you could never get on EQD, merely that they wanted you to put some more work into it. I can understand it felt dismissive and rude, but it's never the intent to be unkind. It's why we tend to hold off on giving feedback as it can seem unkind. The fact you got feedback means the pre-reader liked your story and would like to see it be worked on and return.
3317255 Well, the email, at least to me, seemed to very clearly imply that the nature of the story it its very core was keeping it from making it on to EqD. Because it clashes with canon (which didn't exist when I wrote it, might I add once more), because it's a story that's been "told too many times" and because the author overall found it "Weak" (which was another vague thing that was given zero explanation as to WHY they found it weak, it just was).
The only thing that could be worked on without writing an entirely different story is the grammar, and it honestly seemed like the pre-reader just threw that in to make the review not come across as "my god, this story is completely uninteresting to me", and so they could pretend like they actually invested time into reading the story instead of just lightly skimming it.
3317215 How much explanation does "go find an editor" need? If it was more than a passing comment, then the pre-reader is either giving you full line-by-line feedback or wasting his time. And how is it condescending to say the story doesn't stand out from the many others we receive which cover the same topic?
But given that you're completely dismissing the advice (which again, you're conveniently cherry-picking and obscuring to present it in as favorable a light to you as possible) and not taking me up on my offer to help you, were you ever really interested in improving the story in the first place? Or were you just thinking that anyone worth his salt could never take any issue with it?
3317265 I'm not dismissing the fact that edits need to be made; it's just that the review was written in such a way that any actual, FIXABLE issues with the story that don't require me writing an entirely different story were minimal. Revfer to my comment above: it honestly seemed like the pre-reader just threw that in to make the review not come across as "my god, this story is completely uninteresting to me", and so they could pretend like they actually invested time into reading the story instead of just lightly skimming it.
This isn't also the first time I've gotten a story rejected with ridiculous, inanely arbitrary reasons tacked in; for instance, one of my stories had a rejection reason listed as "Rarity said darling far too often, she doesn't actually say it that much". I checked through, and it had 4 instances of her saying "darling". I checked the latest fic that had just been passed onto EqD that contained Rarity, and she said it TWELVE times. That story was only 1k longer than the one I had written.
Things like this happen all the time in EqD reviews and I'm not sure why, with all the complaints about the fic reviewing process that occur, there hasn't been some attempt to make it more objective, because whether or not you get into EqD is almost completely dependent on either 1) who you get as a pre reader or 2) who you are in the fandom.
3317262 If the story could never make it, then why give any further response than "no"? It'd be wasted verbiage. And no, the response didn't say the story was weak. It said it was weak because... reasons I won't include here, since you apparently don't want them included.
If you want help, I've offered it. If all you want is to whip up anti-EqD sentiment, then there's no point in my discussing it anymore.
3317218 You know what, I'm not in the mood to be your punching bag, Reggie. To be honest I don't know why you don't, I dunno, take what criticisms you got, as vague as they are, and use them as a baseline to improve your story instead of bitching and moaning on the internet about the fact that you recieved criticism. I'd like to think, foolish as it is due to our only correspondence being online, that I'm one of your best friends, and that instead of dismissing my gentle admonitions of you to calm down and look at this more objectively that you would listen to me and take my advice. I suppose that your frustration and self-pity is more important to you than a friend kindly telling you in a somewhat jocular way to get over it and make something useful from it. That makes me really, really sad.
Also, I'm still waiting on that fic you told me you would have released before Bronycon as part of our mutural style exploration. I put out five stories and not one of them did as well as I had hoped they would, being an emulation of your style and perhaps an emulation of your struggles. If you want to be angry and frustrated with EQD, fine. I don't like them much myself. But don't dismiss my plea for you to grow up a little bit and accept criticism instead of being salty about recieving it, and furthermore treat me, a friend, in such a condenscending way.
tl;dr stop ignoring what other people are trying to tell you in favor of continuing to be miserable about EQD not wanting your horsefic.
3317276 If you think saying "darling" too often was really a major reason for rejecting a story, you're fooling yourself. It's a little out of character for her to say it so much, but if that was literally the only issue the pre-reader had with it, then it would have been posted. You fix up enough stuff, it gets posted. You don't have to change everything. Rejected authors love to pick out one individual thing and claim it's the sole reason. That's really disingenuous, and it's also really presumptive. If you'd prefer getting no feedback at all, then say so. You wouldn't be the first.
3317262 The pre-reader policy is to not give feedback unless it's asked for or if they feel a story has merit. If you'd like more detailed feedback, you're always welcome to ask for it and we'll do our best to accommodate you. We can't be used as a dedicated editing service since we get so many submissions is all.
While saying a story has been done before can feel harsh, I think it simply means you need to try and polish it to stand out. "Those Blue Wings" by Tchernobog stands out as a great example of using the typical Dash loses her wings idea and doing something unique with it. I don't think you'd need to entirely rewrite it, though I'm sorry you feel that way.
I can promise that pre-readers tend to avoid stories that don't catch their interest. We want people to succeed, no matter what it may feel like. The purpose is to help you see where you need to reach, not to discourage.
Please know I'm not trying to offend, but I'm not sure how to ask this as it's a bit of a touchy idea. Ddo you think maybe a bit of the problem could be of you expecting to be approved without needing to do any extra work on your part?
3317287 Woah, dude, calm down; I'm not treating you like a "punching bag", Im just saying that because YOU often get very salty about things (especially in comment sections) that it's a bit hypocritical to call me "salty".
Well, they rejected someone for Octavia being OOC. Years before Slice of Life gave Octavia any canon personality. What did you expect?
3317282 Now, I don't think EqD is entirely terrible. I don't even think it's terrible at all, to be honest. I just think the way a certain section of it it (the fic submission) is run very poorly, because I have always received terribly biased reports rejecting my stories. However, I won't deny that editing is still required for the fics, I just think that very little stress was put on the need for editing and too much on very arbitrary and trivial aspects of the fic.
3317304 I'm not trying to claim it's the SOLE reason; I'm merely pointing it out as something that's added because "I think this should be edited" clearly isn't enough for the rejection. The pre-readers often go in and nitpick completely ridiculous qualities of the story in order to fully justify the flunking of the fic, and I feel like it's an unneeded and useless addition to the review.
3317462 I won't lie to you, I was expecting there to be a much more significant chance of success with this story. However, what really disappointed me was how poorly the review was written. It focused so much on "you didn't predict the tantibus" and "this is an unoriginal idea" that it made me feel like the pre-readers haven't really overcome their tendency to be very arbitrary and nitpicky about the stories. The rejection didn't focus too much on things I could change and instead on things that would have been solved by a single look at the publication date.
3317621 I used to go there every day. Now I go here instead.
This is where the stories live. GET YOU ONE!
Catch a ride!
3316414
http://inception.davepedu.com/
You're welcome.
3316910
>dat meem
3317621
How much is too much before the grammar alone is "clearly" enough to reject a story? I'm not exaggerating here when I say that whenever you had Luna speak in an archaic style, you barely ever got the grammar right. When one of your major characters is so consistently wrong, and it's not intentional, there's a pretty serious problem. And that's even if the rest were perfect. Cold in Gardez himself could have written it, and we'd still tell him to fix that. We want stories that show skill across the board, so it is going to be a problem for us when a story has significant mechanical problems. It is going to be a problem when it doesn't do anything to distinguish itself from the dozens of other stories we get that deal with the identical subject matter. We're never going to budge from that, and you're never going to budge from calling those stupid reasons to reject a story. I'd hope we could agree to disagree without being insulting.
In fact, quite the opposite. I've offered twice now to help you with your story. So I'll offer one more time. Put it in GDocs, send me a link, and I'll leave a bunch of comments. I'll look at the changes you make and leave more comments. Rinse and repeat until I think it'd get accepted by EqD. I won't make you change the story you want to tell. I will make you tell it better. Aside from the grammar, you seem really reluctant to even concede the story could need some improvement. So I guess it's not too surprising you haven't taken my offer, but it's really odd how you won't even acknowledge it while going on about how awful the pre-readers are.
3321621 Again: I only focused on the stupid reasons for rejecting the story. I never said that the fact that it needs grammatical editing for the old english a "Stupid reason". What irked me about the review is that it is written in such a way that it hardly addresses the fact that it needs that work. It's simple mentioned in passing and then goes on to rant about how the story does not conform to a canon that did not exist at the time.
I didn't mean to ignore your offers; I suppose I got so caught up in trying to get my point across that I just forgot to address them. Here's the link now, anyway: Sail To The Moon
3321638 Do you actually intend to work on the story? I have plenty to keep me busy, and I don't want to waste my time.
3321666 I do. I realize I've been coming off as stubborn but that was mostly due to anger on my part. I intend on advancing as a writer, and when people offer me constructive criticism and edits, I take them. The reason I was irked at this review, as I've said before (and have no issue saying again), is because there was so little emphasis on what I could change and tons of emphasis on something that would have never even been mentioned had the pre-reader checked when the story was published. I do have every intention of fixing it up grammatically and maybe even changing sections of the story that either do not make sense or you feel would be better as something else if you make an exceptionally convincing argument for that
3321727
*sigh*
See, you're already starting this off on the wrong foot. You've already said you're unlikely to listen to anything that isn't a very black and white issue, and taken an antagonistic voice that you don't have to do what I say. I know that. It's inherent in any review. But it really creates the wrong mindset to shove that in the reviewer's face before he's even begun. Where's my motivation to spend hours on this if it's likely to fall on deaf ears? It shouldn't take "exceptionally convincing" arguments. It should take arguments that tip the balance in their favor, however small the margin. I'll even change things in my own stories that I don't think make them better as long as I don't think it makes them worse either, if one of the folks I've asked to take a look at it says so. In fact, it pays to look at it from the other direction: if someone makes a logical argument for something, I'd better be able to come up with a convincing argument for myself to keep it the way I had it (it's just that most reviewers don't provide a logical argument).
3317509
It's entirely possible for a background character like Octavia to be OOC. For one, she would need to conform to the little bits we do get from canon or explain why there's a deviation. If a story states that she hates playing the cello without ever addressing why she does so professionally in canon, that'd be OOC. She also has to be internally consistent within a story. If chapter 1 establishes her as a teetotaler, then chapter two suddenly has her binge drinking, that's also OOC.