Noting that this entry is for two individuals working together on a concept, M-The-Writer and Maginowo.
Today I received a PM from M-The-Writer:
Hi. Me and my friend have small problem with critic because nobody is writing to us. I wrote to 12 people from Butterflyy but only 3 wrote back to me, but from this 3 people only one sayed something more then "I don't like this concept, It's not my type of history" . Can you help find me new people to say something about our SCP.
http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-13947701/the-inventor#post-4850055
Looking at the thread, the user seems to have rather uncharitably represented the responses they received from reviewers. Most notably, Maginowo received thorough responses from two reviewers, and in discussion with the reviewer who didn't "sayed something more then "I don't like this concept"", they repeatedly tried to push draft reads on them despite the reviewer stating that they do not read sandbox drafts when providing concept critique (when asked about narrative/story overview, Maginowo responded by posting a 1000-word draft excerpt and asking what the reviewer thought of it).
The fact that they also contacted a dozen reviewers is also questionable.
I sent back a reply noting:
[…] As of now, it will be very difficult attempting to find anyone willing to comment on your work. The dismissive tone and lack of engagement with the reviewers in your responses makes it seem rather unpleasant to work with you as an author. How much are you willing to change your material in response to feedback, and will you reply politely to reviewers if you receive negative feedback from them? If it seems like you're refusing to acknowledge when your material needs edits for improvement, it seems like a waste of reviewers time to comment on what they think needs fixing. |
Keep an eye on if they've interacted similarly with additional reviewers.
More conversation:
I'm sorry for this worlds, but i don't receive any critic informations. Last person was really helpful but rest of the team said that's "this is not type of their story". So I still don't know what to change to be better in this. I think my scp is interesting but i believe that can be better if somebody would say what is wrong but for now i only write what they want to know about this SCP, nobody said what could be fixed and how to fix this. That's why I'm writing to you.
Sent back:
I'm sorry for this worlds, but i don't receive any critic informations. Last person was really helpful but rest of the team said that's "this is not type of their story". So I still don't know what to change to be better in this.
cybersqyd gave you several suggestions on what to address.
I think my scp is interesting but i believe that can be better if somebody would say what is wrong
Per cybersqyd:
- "My core concern with this proposal is that the central narrative section falls into two pitfalls: it's extremely focussed on what the SCP does to the point where it doesn't even mention the Foundation; and it's also extremely flat."
- "At it's core, my issue is that this needs something interesting to happen with the pieces you've set up."
- "Why does the inventor break into Site 19? Also it sounds like this is contradicting the last thing you said about the inventor"
- "My central concern is that this isn't a story: it's a long, kinda rambly text"
- "it needs to go somewhere: you are, after all, trying to tell a story and stories are characterised by how stuff changes; and at the moment, there's no change"
- "it really needs… something to happen to break the status quo and then some stuff to happen to work towards either creating a new status quo or to return it to the old status quo"
but for now i only write what they want to know about this SCP, nobody said what could be fixed and how to fix this. That's why I'm writing to you.
I cannot help you find more reviewers if your response to reviewers is to insist that just because someone doesn't think your piece is to their taste, they did not tell you anything about what needed fixing. If you are having difficulty understanding what to do to address someone's concerns, you need to ask them what they would like to see (or give simple suggestions to see what they think) rather than just asking them to read through drafts and unrelated extraneous details.
Their reply:
Ok, I understand that now.It's It's our first SCP so we don't always understand what was a critic. It's not a problem that someone don't understand this story. It's better because then i can learn how to write, so people can understand this topic. We are still in idea section so we were writing that in a smaller version. So please help us understand how to be better in this and how to understand what reviewers want from us.
Wait I want to be clear in that, because I think I understand what the problem was. You noticed it, but I didn't. Is it wrong, that we wrote every time some kind of a story, instead of short answers to critics questions?
Thank you, I understand now what we were doing wrong. From now we'll be writing answers to critics in this correct way. So could you help us find reviewers?
(my replies removed since it was basically just me repeating myself. I did tell them that my assisting them with seeking further reviewers was dependent on them apologizing to cybersqyd and responding properly to their feedback)