(TL;DR summary at bottom of post)

I have a one-shot comedy crossover story called My Little Frasier, which is a Frasier/MLP crossover. It had about 15 likes, zero dislikes and 120 views at time of submission, which is good, but I wanted to see if I could get it more exposure. So, naturally, I submitted the fic to EQD. I figured that it was well-written and had good grammar and good comedy. And Frasier is one of the most popular sitcoms ever. So there was no way I’d get rejected, right? Haha, nope.

So over three weeks later (for a 4,000 word oneshot with only about two dozen other stories in the queue) not only was I rejected for invalid reasons, but I also received the rudest, most unprofessional, most nonsensical rejection letter I’ve ever read. It was also chock full of typos, which I found funny from a website which prides itself on its high grammar standards.

Basically, the pre-reader said that he wasn’t familiar with Frasier, so he didn’t know if it was funny or not, and he also said that I didn’t give the characters enough exposition and development. The full letter can be found here for your reading (dis)pleasure.

Here’s some choice quotes from his letter in case you didn’t want to read the whole thing:

“None of the characters are given any background, and in general the story doesn't bother itself with such spurious things as context and back-story and making us care for the characters, to a point that it gets rather grating and worrying.

Like cutting the first ten chapters of a book and then giving it to us in hopes we still like it, your submission just doesn't have the foundation it needs to carry itself. If you have a Frasier background, the thing is an interesting adaptation, but becuase [sic] I'm reading this as a reader which most likely doesn't even know what a Frasier is, you are not making any sense whatsoever.”

Like cutting the first Ten chapters? So they’re expecting me to turn my one-shot into a NOVEL for the sake of people who haven’t watched Frasier who might be reading? When I already DO provide character and story development in the fic, as I pointed out in my response letter to him?

“Most likely don’t know what a Frasier is” Are you kidding me? The show ran for TEN seasons, was widely critically acclaimed, ended less than a decade ago, and is still in re-runs, but this pre-reader has the audacity to say that people “most likely don’t know what a Frasier is”? Maybe if you’re living under a rock.

“Assuming you fixed that, the story would probably get a thumbs up and be on the blog.
Well, that's not right, because the story also has some terrible need for extremely redundant author asides which has proven to be the first time I actually felt the story would be left better without his constant interjections which provide as much to the plot as nailing ones nails with brass nails unto a wall.“

“As nailing ones nails with brass nails unto a wall?” What, was that supposed to be a joke or something? I don’t get it. If you’re going to insult my story and take potshots at it, at least get the insult correct.

“Well that’s not right, because the story also has…”
Okay, why are you deliberately being rude? What, is this guy fifteen years old? He might as well have said “Yeah, sure we’d accept your story after you changed it… NOT! Psych! Your mom! There’s loads of other shit you still gotta do, loser!” Which he ultimately does end up basically saying like three paragraphs later:

“So, if you fixed this, and the previous one, and the one before, you could get a thumbs up and get a chance to be in the blog. Until I figure something else to be bothered by, that is.”

So he’s basically admitting that I’m going to get another strike when I resubmit this, because he’ll just find something new to be bothered about. Or, rather, he’s saving something from this e-mail that he didn’t tell me about just so he can give it another strike.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1krHFx5iDdiEXyFhtl6cTVl_AD9GA4EK0yPfKnXCsLRI/edit

So, here’s the response that I wrote. I’d like to I think I was respectful enough, but basically I told him that people generally don’t read crossovers unless they’re familiar with the work being crossed over with. I also questioned the fact that he hadn’t watched Frasier, and wondered why this wasn’t passed along to a pre-reader who HAD watched Frasier. Surely, I said, there must be someone among EQD’s dozens of pre-readers who has watched one of the most popular sitcoms of all time. Why didn’t he have one of them look at it? I wait three weeks for my 4,000 word one-shot crossover to be read by someone not even familiar with the crossover? What gives?

I also pointed out the fact that I DID provide exposition, both in the story description and in the character’s actions.

From my response e-mail,

reading extra exposition about the characters like the kind that you ask me to give would be like reading a Sonic the Hedgehog crossover and it saying, "Doctor Eggman was Sonic's greatest nemesis. He was a portly, mustachioed man who built many contraptions with his technical expertise. He had many ships and eggbots who followed his every whim. He was also incredibly vain and egomaniacal, and hung posters of himself all over his palace."

See, if I'm a Sonic fan, I'm already going to know all of this and get annoyed at there being so much exposition. If I'm not a Sonic fan, chances are I won't be reading a Sonic crossover.

Also,

If I'm not a fan of Frasier and want to know more, like their personalities, appearance, likes, dislikes, etc. then that is revealed in the story. I don't have to say "they were prissy intellectual snobs yearning for social acceptance" because that's already revealed through their actions, such as Frasier missing work to go to a party, or Niles buying fancy coffee with a million adjectives in front of it.

It's a little thing called, "Show, don't tell."

I still haven't gotten a response back, and it's been two days, so hopefully I'll get one back explaining all of this. HOPEFULLY, I get an apology for his rude and unprofessional behavior.

But I'm not holding my breath.

Let me be clear to any other EQD prereaders who are reading this: I understand that you are not all like this. I don't "hate" EQD, even though I'm in this group. I'm trying to help you improve so that you don't act like this guy. I'm a capitalist and I understand you are a business. I want your business to succeed. So treat your "customers" better. I think that sometimes you guys forget that you need fanfiction (and other content) to post just as much as authors and creators need you to post it for them.

For a website which holds itself up as promoting the highest-quality fan-fiction, and prides itself in its professionalism, I would have expected better. I've been treated better by the seventeen-year-old high school dropout serving me at McDonalds. I've had cops treat me better after pulling me over. That's no lie. You guys need to get your act together or there WILL be another pony blog that eclipses you, as sure as I'm sitting here.

TL;DR: My crossover comedy story was rejected by a pre-reader who wasn't even familiar with the work being crossed over. This after I had waited for over three weeks for a response to my 4,000 word oneshot. Also, he was incredibly rude to me. His letter was full of typos and errors and was generally unprofessional in tone. For a website which holds itself up as promoting the highest-quality fan-fiction and acting professional, I would have expected better.

1262454
Mate this happens all the time, there's no consistency to what gets through EQD.

1262454 As much as I hate EqG, I have to side with them this time, except for their incessant need to complexify their vocabulary to look "smarts". The letter was in no way aggressive, but shrugging it off because of the SUBJECT?! What the fu--

Anyways, he gave some insight to what must be done (with spelling errors and questionable sentence structuring here and there. How the tables have turned), but he didn't bash it violently. This must be the first time you submitted something to them, am I right? You know you're just going to get on their black list if you do things like this? Be lucky that you got the "soft" pre-reader.

The worst part, though, is that he linked you to the chans!

1262483

Anyways, he gave some insight to what must be done (with spelling errors and questionable sentence structuring here and there. How the tables have turned), but he didn't bash it violently.

This particular pre-reader does not speak English as a first language.

An EqD blacklist does not exist, by the way. There is only one author EqD does not take submissions for, because he has routinely threatened to commit suicide over his rejections.

Well, that didn't seem so bad... I can't find anything to hate on in this post.

I hope Alex sees this. It's something that can be addressed best by him.

1262483 I've submitted to them on three other occasions before this, all of which resulted in rejections. This ain't my first rodeo. But it's the first time I've been so rudely rejected.

Once was my story The Trouble With Unicorns, which I freely admit they had every right to reject. They gave me some good feedback. I was still a relatively new author when I submitted that, and it's since been through several re-writes. (It's hardly the same story anymore). I would've re-submitted it again, but it's since gotten "popular" enough that I'm content with the current exposure I have for it on FimFic.

Another one was Westboro In Equestria, which they rejected for naming real people in it. Fair enough, I guess.

Another one was The Ponion, (satirical news articles written about Equestria in the style of The Onion) which they rejected for lack of a consistent narrative, so they didn't consider it fan-fiction. However, EQD is the same site which posted The Equestrian Inquirer, which is a periodical-like fic, so I don't know why they treated me with a double-standard there, either.

My Little Frasier, I'll admit is far from perfect, but the issue that they seemed to have rejected it for (lack of exposition into source material) is not a valid reason. Look at these other crossover fics which EQD has posted, all of which provide even less exposition than I do in My Little Frasier.

World of Ponycraft
Unless you're familiar with WoW, which I'm not, you're going to be completely lost in the first paragraph. All of the characters, items, etc. are given NO exposition. At least the description of MLF tells you who the characters are.

Better Living Through Science and Ponies
Unless you're familiar with Portal, which I am, you're going to be lost here, too. And actually, even though I'm familiar with Portal, I'm STILL sort of lost.

A Tale of Two Worlds
Here's one which was posted just a few weeks ago. It's an Avengers crossover which takes place right after Loki was imprisoned. NO exposition is given, and this story assumes that you've seen Avengers, which I haven't.

1262454 A similar thing happened to me. They rejected my Jon Lajoie/MLP crossover story not because of spelling and grammar errors, but rather because the prereader didn't think Jon Lajoie was funny. Just goes to show that the prereaders at EqD are a big bunch of hypocrites.

1262707 I would question, then, why the pre-reader would choose to review that story. From my understanding, EQD pre-readers are given prerogative over which stories to pick. Why would he/she read a Jon Lajoie crossover if he/she didn't find that comedian to be funny? It blows my mind.

1262789 Don't ask me. I don't run the site, and if I did, then the prereading system would be much clearer on what is acceptable and unacceptable in a fiction.

Also there would be a lot less Trixie.

1262454
Who the hell rejected this? I've never heard of so delightfully insane a crossover before!

By the by, awesome cover art.

For what it's worth:

I've spoken to the prereader in question about this particular rejection. Apparently there's a matter of some miscommunication on his part: he meant to bring up the idea of someone unfamiliar with the series in question, not purport that he was said individual.

Furthermore, while a few people have actually said they prefer a more human, earnest tone to their responses from us, I also mentioned the specific points that could be taken as untactful. That last bit about 'think of something else' is obviously a joke, but possibly made in poor taste.

Lastly, I've asked the prereader in question to reach out to the author in an attempt to explain the tone and content of the rejection. This prereader is usually very eager to help writers outside of the standard EQD process, so hopefully this exchange will prove beneficial.

Sorry on behalf of the rest of the prereading staff for any confusion. Hopefully further positive exchange will continue down the line.

Cheers,
NTSTS

1262454

This is amusing. But, I need to correct you on one thing:

Exposition in any story is needed for anyone to understand what's going on. I have a Fallout story in which the Wanderer is evil. But, how will the readers know that? I advertised it to be that way, sure, but the description never said so. So, in order to actually give some detail, I gave exposition of the game's timeline and how my character dealt with everything.

Of course, I didn't go into super hardcore detail. Just enough to make my character believable and to show that he's criminal scum.

But, my story isn't a oneshot. So, this comment can be void.

1262997 Thank you for your prompt and professional addressing of this issue. There are no hard feelings on my end. I will continue this discussion with the pre-reader through e-mail.

1263016 I might need to add a bit more exposition than I have. My concern was that it might seem redundant in light of the fact that people reading my crossover would probably already be familiar with the work in question. Hopefully I can work with the pre-reader on what he deems to be the appropriate amount to introduce people unfamilar with Frasier but to not seem redundant to fans of the show.

1262658
I want to point out real quick that you're criticizing your pre-reader for insinuating that most people haven't seen Frasier, while also admitting that you haven't seen The Avengers, a film which, judging by its box office returns, pretty much every person alive on Earth and quite a few dead ones bought a ticket to see.

Of course, there's also a greater point to be made here about it always and inarguably being the author's responsibility to assume the readers of their crossover are going in blind to the non-MLP canon, but I'm not that confident about it getting through to its intended subject. When even the members of IHED are saying there's not much to be offended about in an EqD review, I'd say the odds are pretty good that they're on to something there.

Least your reviewer didn't send you a picture of a comatosed Lyra in their rejection response.

Mines did.

1263144 It is difficult to convey tone on the internet: that's why smilies were invented NTSTS has spoken to him, so I'll just let it go at that. Water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.

I want to point out real quick that you're criticizing your pre-reader for insinuating that most people haven't seen Frasier, while also admitting that you haven't seen The Avengers, a film which, judging by its box office returns, pretty much every person alive on Earth and quite a few dead ones bought a ticket to see.

I don't need to have seen The Avengers to refute the argument that most people haven't seen Frasier. That's an ad hominem argument.

And yeah, I haven't seen the Avengers. So I wouldn't read that Avengers fic. Even if I wanted to, the fic gives no exposition whatsoever about the characters or Avengers backstory. Same with the other two fics that I posted. So to expect me to give in-depth introductions to all of my characters while not expecting the other fics to give any introductions AT ALL is a complete double standard.

I at least give my readers the courtesy of telling them who Frasier and Niles are, what their occupation is, and where they live, right there in the description.

The Avengers fic expects you to already know who Loki is, as well as all the other avengers characters. It never once says "Loki is the god of such and such, and his powers are such and such."

But yet I am the one who needs to expound more on my characters, not him? What gives?

I guess you're about to argue that Frasier isn't as popular as the Avengers, so more people would need an introduction to it (that's generously assuming that I didn't even give an introduction or exposition at all, which I did), but that's comparing apples to oranges. Movie sales are measured in box office sales in terms of dollars, whereas TV viewership is measured by Nielsen in terms of millions of viewers. That's not counting re-runs. They're not possible to easily compare. Especially since movie ticket prices vary by theater, and in some places it costs $10 to see a movie. So if you say that it grossed $150 million, that could be anywhere from 15 to 20 million viewers. That's not counting DVD sales.

Popularity is a fickle thing, but there are objective measures of it. Let's see what Wikipedia has to say.

Frasier had over 10 million viewers as judged by Nielsen for each of its ten seasons.
How I Met Your Mother has yet to crack the 10 million mark for any of its nine seasons.
The highest that Arrested Development ever got was 6.5 million.

So If I wrote a HIMYM crossover, would I need to give explanation as to who Barney, Robyn, Lilly, Ted, and Marshall are? Given the standards you have applied to me, I would. But not only would I have to provide an explanation, I'd have to go in-depth. I couldn't just say "Barney is a womanizing stud who always wears suits," because apparently that same sort of cursory description is not good enough for Frasier, an even higher-rated show where I said "Doctor Frasier Mane is a psychiatrist living in Canterlot. He has a radio show, the Dr. Frasier Mane Show, in which he dispenses advice to the mentally-troubled denizens. He attempts to maintain a good relationship among the Canterlot upper-class."

Let's look at yet another EQD-posted fanfic which does not introduce the characters, A Storm of Chaos: A Doctor Whooves Adventure. I read the entire first chapter and this story did not explain who Doctor Whooves is, what the TARDIS is, or anything like that. You are expected to already know that going in, and that seems to be fine with EQD.

So can you please explain this to me? How much exposition and character introduction do I need to give? Why are these fics not required to introduce their characters at all in the description or the story, and yet I introduce my characters right there in the description and the pre-reader says, "I don't know who these characters are." What do I have to do, copy and paste the bio for Frasier from Wikipedia right into the beginning of my fic?

1262454

Well he does have some good points, the best writing does not require anyone to have any prior knowledge, but the same thing get's by with most fanfiction on the pony side, and I think other crossovers have gotten through before.

1263393
Haha what?

1263393
1264261
...
*whistles away merrily*

The only stupid thing here is the facts

1. He didn't know what it was a crossover of yet he read it.

2. It's a comedy it has no need for a in depth backstory to further the ridiculousness of this it's a one-shot so a long long backstory or even a partial backstory isn't really needed.

The backfiring of this complaint.

EQD got like 20 new proofreaders and most of them are REALLY new to this stuff.

1264261

Look it up, I hear you have a record of the letters.

I was none too pleased.

Doesn't take much to guess who sent it.

Image: http://24.media.tumblr.com/87928c40193ec3945e21dfc7f06b6de9/tumblr_mkgfp5MAkG1rqzrdio1_500.png

It is part of the reason I no longer visit your site in any form, certainly nothing there that I can't get elsewhere anyway.

1266589>>1264261

1262454

I know how you feel. They were unprofessional to me as well the last time I was rejected.

If it's any consolation at all then I know what Frasier is, and I enjoy watching it, so I'll make sure to read your story.

1266589 That reminds me of this one time I went to a job interview, and I didn't get the job, so they sent me an e-mail with a picture of a guy asleep at his desk.

Just kidding, that never happened to me.

1262789
Because certain types of people like to bitch about the things they hate more than they like to talk about the things they love. These types of people are often attracted to moderator positions so that they can act out on their hate more than usual.

1267677

Who could doubt that they are the pinnacle of professionalism? I am truly in awe of their magnificent highbrow standards.

1266589
That's incredible.

1268108

I'm sure it is, forgive me for not being impressed.

1266589

Doesn't take much to guess who sent it.

Dem powers of deduction.
I sign all my emails, and if you want to bring an issue, I'm one of the most accessible folk around. This isn't the proper forum for it, but if you wanna have the discussion, link a thread for it.

1278221

At the end of the day, discussing it won't change the end result of that email, so I would consider it pointless for us to continue in that regard.

I do have one question however.

Is that how you normally deal with people whose stories reject? Or were you having a bad day?

Sorry to say this, but you came off as a demeaning asshole in your letter, someone who was being unpleasant sheerly for the purpose of antagonizing me, and that picture? That fucking hurt. Asides from being degrading and utterly insulting, it fucking hurt.

1278511

As you wish. If you ever change your mind, or even prefer to have a private talk, you know where to find me.

In regards to the rest, I've got your rejection email open now for a refresher browse, and I gotta say, if that genuinely hurt your feelers, you must be pretty new to the whole writing thing. One of the most important aspects of growing as a writer is intellectual honesty and thick skin. Had you taken the piece to a place for an actual in-depth review, you get used to being ripped a new one at /length/ (likely on a variety of issues above and beyond the ones I raised).
The only personal opinions involved in your rejection were pretty self-evidently such. And I don't really consider a jpg of comatose Lyra included as a reaction to 13k words of narration with no dialogue drastically insulting. I am, however, genuinely sorry that you did.
I was never out to hurt your feelings, but did intend to give you an experienced perspective unbiased by previous affiliation with your work—a bubble too many authors never stray out of.
In any case, cheers, and seriously: keep writing.

1278995

Alright then, I had already taken a reasonable part of your review in for consideration before this, and decided to act upon what you pointed out, but thanks for clarification in this about your intent.

I was expecting a rejection letter from EQD anyway, but I guess I thought would be more routine than anything like this. Maybe I took it a bit too hard. I'll give your review a bit more thought in terms of whether I want to implement some of your other suggestions, but it won't be returning to EQD.

I am relatively new to writing for a crowd and I think this was probably unsuitable for EQD due to its older narrative style as well as some of the points you brought up in your review. As for an in depth review, I got one from The Equestrian Critics Society before this with a very different result.

Keep writing? You don't need to tell me to do that, I already have seven more stories in development currently. Really the main result of your review was to make me more determined to continue, even if I was a little sore about the whole situation. I guess I owe you an apology for overreacting a little here, and probably EQD too - although I don't always agree with what they do- so sorry for taking your critique too personally, although I don't agree with some of your points, I'll keep them in mind.

Anyway, we have clogged this thread up enough, think its time we left it alone now.
Have a good day!

UPDATE

The situation has been rectified; I have gotten a second opinion on the story. Though they will not post it to the blog, I now have a fuller understanding of the reasoning behind EQD's rejection decision of my story.

I thank EQD for clarifying their earlier response.