Suggestion

Like it.

I actually think the whole site should be run alongthese lines (in that the cherry picking should be crowdsourced). I think it would make for a more engaging and vibrant community. I did write to Tony about this but I guess he has not had time to reply yet (all that cherrypicking probably!!).

Yeah, sounds good. Even if standard cherrypicking remained, it would be good to have a "user's choice" or similar running parallel with it.

Dare I suggest a facebook style 'like' function? Or is that dumbing down too much?

We have ratings anyway, right? They're just switched off, IIRC.

Oh, and while I'm on it, what about the booktribes-esque mirroring comments on stories to the 'discuss writing' forum?

Not mad on the FB like function (I do know someone who 'likes' all their own statuses!!)

The bones of my idea were to have a rating system that selected the cherries. Obviously this would need some thought but I think people would feel engaged more with the whole process. The traditional ABC model of editors has on the whole worked well but I think that more user engagement is the way forward generally on the web.

It's a good idea.

Would need a decent cash prize to generate entries beyond the usual suspects, though.

Cash prize-perhaps if (along the lines of poker tournaments online), ABC said that the winner was guaranteed x pounds (a largish amount)-this usually means loads of people enter and the proze fund is beyond the 'guaranteed' level. A tad risky at first but if people think that only 9 people will enter and the prize is £27, then only 9 people will enter and the prize WILL be £27...if they know the prie will be at least £200, you'll be damn sure you get more than 9 entries. Maybe. Hopefully.

heh - 'liking' my own statuses still tickles me.

David - my head knows your right, but my heart says that there must be something ABC can find as a prize that will make the whole venture profitable. That's why I thought guaranteed publication somewhere.

This may well be a bit naive, but I always figured that it wouldn't be that hard to pick up a prize along those lines from a company in return for a ton of advertising.

In any case, my instinct is that low entry fees and high participation would be preferable to the reverse.

B

OK - David F and I are working on this now. It's very like an idea called BookSlam that we had worked up into a big deal last year until Oxfam pulled the plug at the very last minute.

But this looks like fun and we'll get back to you on it.

Crossed posts with BBF - I think you're right, and I also think ABC isn't in a position to take a punt on guaranteed entrants. Recent comps seem to have had really variable entry rates.

But the model you describe is the best I can think of to make profit on these things.

The power of the crowd rarely fails-that's why ebay works, that's why poker tournaments are never underfunded (in terms of entry fees to guaranteed prize money).

The power of the crowd is indeed strong: however, I'm not so sure that it rarely fails. I'm not convinced by the quality of all of the winners of Pop Idol/X-Factor and all the other cloned talent programs. Of course, a few people who have come second have done very well.

ABC needs money, X Factor makes money. Moreover, ABC is not on ITV. Also, X factor et al are not pure crowdsourcing as the judges have a say and exert influence.

Are you absolutely convinced about crowd-sourcing though? I still have my reservations. If, and I mean if, the contributory numbers were sufficient, I'd be inclined to agree it could work for ABC. However, the active membership seems somewhat less numerous than in the early heady days, from what I can gather. It would be so easy to distort any results with the current (active) user base.

You are right though, ABC needs money. It's interesting that Enzo seems to imply that a tenner is quite a stiff entry fee. Nevertheless, I'd be very interested to see if nominal fees would generate significantly more numerous entries to any competition.

I'm not 100% convinced, no. However, I think the ABC model could do with a revamp, indeed such changes may be crucial to its future. More user participation is the way forward, I'm convinced of that certainly.

Yes, I agree.

I imagine clever maths types have worked out formulas with this kind of thing.

Variables include:
- number of people who know about the competition
- whether they're people who would want to enter this sort of competition in broad and general sense
- level of entry fee
- ease of entry process
- desirability of the prize
- perceived chance of winning the competition

This competition costs £26 to enter and is quite successful: http://www.poetrybusiness.co.uk/index.php/enter-online

Buk-yes indeed.

-number of people who are aware

well ABC has lagged in this area, only a very recent presence on twitter, no ABC presence on facebook etc. One tweet from a big twitter celeb and everything changes (and it does happen, I do it regularly for other sites I am involved with).

Also, I would add to your list the judging process and how transparent it is, gravitas of judges,

If interested in making money, and this is fully half baked, have a host editor select 1 poem/story out of the [n] last posted, then let readers make tiny wagers on which one it is. This could be an interesting literary game as the host editor answers critical questions and leaves behind clever and even misleading clues, and let the bets be movable over time (quite interesting). The longer the game goes on, the higher the lucre, which can be split out amongst the site/author/host editor/winning readers. The secret work is revealed in the magazine with full critical analysis. Not to turn the site into a casino, but handled the right way it could be educational, massive fun, and put focus squarely on the work. I bet a load of people would suddenly start reading poems and stories.

Tony - Want me to knock up a Facebook fan page for ABCtales?

Yes please - but I thought we had one already. I've just tried to find it without success - so please do - and I'll post the Twitter story of the day on there as well!

TC-"I thought we had one" is slightly worrying, no? I said you didn't because you haven't (at least not obviously).

I'm not the most techie soul on here as you well know. I went to my Facebook page and couldn't find the 'groups I am a member of' bit - so couldn't find the group concerned. Ho Hum. Enzo is now sorting a new one out!

I don't want to ignore you. I don't agree with your user led cherrying system - it will end up like authonomy where cliques control the situation. That's why their figures seem to be dropping like a stone (if you can believe the alexa/ compare stats which I'm not sure you can).

Otherwise if you want to help then please do - I am very open to suggestions!

I don't think you need to be 'techie' to use social media and I think I would make it my business to at least learn the basics if I owned a UGC website. Ho Hum.

No comment!

What sort of cash prize do you think it would take to bring out the big (or at least medium-sized) guns of the literary world? £1,000? £5,000? £20,000? or what? Let's just pretend for a moment that the site had a rich uncle willing to underwrite such a venture.

It wouldn't do the site much good if they just turned up to pinch the prize, but one condition of entry could be that they were members and had put up at least (say) five pieces on the site. In itself, quite a feather in the cap for ABC to have work from household names on site, and to have them as members. Properly publicised, could also be very profitable.

Serve them all right when Ewan wins!

I think there would have to be a substantial £lots headline prize, plus a lot of smaller ones so people felt it worthwhile to enter even if they felt there was no hope of the top prize. There could even be an ABC mug for every entry!

Whaddya think?

My mug box might get to empty! Buy a mug - go on, you know you want one.

On a more serious note it is a wonderful plan. I will ask a few publishers what they think would do for a cash prize of ridiculous proportions. Presumably this is a short story prize?

Well, in The Poetry World:

"National Poetry Competition
Britain's top single poem competition since 1978, the National Poetry Competition is judged anonymously by a new set of judges each year. Top prize is £5000, second prize £1000, third prize £500 and 10 commendations of £50."

This is The Poetry Society's major competition.

People would be interested at £1000, though.

Greater interest in ABC will be a good thing, but an increase in membership, paid or otherwise to access the competitions etc could mean a flood of submissions.

The current limit of three per day may need to be reconsidered. Perhaps a system similar to that successfully used at UKAuthors, with two distinct submission days with a maximum of two pieces at any one time?

I find it hard to keep up with the traffic on this site as it stands and wondered if any one, besides the editors, read every piece that fetches up here?

Ben, I think you've stumbled onto something good here, at least, I think it could be good. I like how it would take place over several weeks. Past competitions are basically over for the participants after the due date, with nothing left but to await the decision. This sounds like something that could keep interest over time.

And whatever fee you guys come up with, keep in mind I'll be paying double...damn worthless $'s.

Has the FB group been created yet? Gonna look for it now, but I guess I wont find Tim there, since he's sworn off FB til 2010.

The facebook fan page is in development. It's on there, but private at the moment until the content is sorted. Hopefully it'll be done over the course of next week.

I'm sure Tony wouldn't mind me opening it up for additional input though - so anyone who is Facebook friends with me, feel free to drop me a line and I'll add you as an admin.

Foster-my FB exile was short lived. Until I go to live in a monastic community with no web access, that is unlikely to change :-)

Just as a matter of interest, what are we hoping to achieve by attracting more people to the site? Cui bono?

Do we want more pieces submitted each day so that work sinks ever more rapidly down the 'newly added' pages?

Do we want to admire the big (and purely fictitious) number of users on the front page?

Is it a case of 'market share is everything', or some other mantra that serves as a substitute for thought?

Do we suppose that new users will click the Google ads, even though existing ones don't?

Do we trust that as the site gains new members, lovely but unspecified benefits are bound to accrue?

Do we believe that new users are better than old?

What, exactly, are we trying to achieve?

Sorry folks, I know you all mean well, and it does seem a nice and appropriate thing to do, and bless you all for doing it. Nor am I saying it's necessarily a bad thing. Just wondering if anybody has given any thought to it? It does have a downside - too many people trying to cram into a structure that is only suitable for a thousand or so real users.

'New lamps for old! New lamps for old!'

"Is it a case of 'market share is everything', or some other mantra that serves as a substitute for thought?"

Well, that's not necessarily a bad mantra. A large share of the market for selling groceries is a thing worth having.

But in the case of ABCtales, we'd need to work which, if any, market we're competing in before worrying about how big a share we've got.

Don't think a Facebook group will do any harm, though. If it did generate so much extra traffic that the site couldn't cope, the would suggest that there's lots of untapped demand for a creative writing website, which would be a good thing to know.

FTSE - I have sent you an email rather than go into it here. Suffice to say that I think we should try to keep positive. People are trying to throw around a few ideas, and that's a good thing. If they're unworkable, then so be it. Explain that and say why, and let's try to keep it constructive.

Ben

Buk - You always get me curious, you always raise a lot of cut-straight-to-the-heart-questions, and I'm particularly interested in your 'what market, if any...' comment.

I know the internet & comms is one of your 'things' - it's not mine. So when you say ABC should work out which market it's competing in (if any), what's the process for doing that? Where do you start?

Is 'web-based writing community' a market in its own right? Or is ABC competing on a wider scale - with online communities generally? How would you go about answering those questions - or are there more pertinent questions that I'm missing to answer first?

My apologies for the somewhat tactless post above. It wasn't my intention to disparage any individual's work or ideas. If Tony goes ahead with the membership subs there will be a very good reason indeed for attracting more people to the site.

It seems to me that the number of ABC users is self-limiting because of the structure of the site. The real action is centred on the 'recently added' page. With fewer users, pieces remain at the top of the list for longer and attract more comments and reads, which makes the site appealing. With more members the pieces sink more rapidly and readers are overloaded with stuff clamouring for attention, work gets fewer reads and comments, and the site becomes less appealing. Eventually we reach an equilibrium of sorts, empirically the level seems to be around the 1000 users mark.

A very interesting piece of information would be what makes people put up a few stories, sometimes a lot of stories, then abandon the site forever.

I dare say an old-fashioned economist would model the situation in terms of marginal utility; a modern economist in terms of indifference curves. An old-fashioned engineer might see it as a sevomechanism; a modern engineer as a feedback loop. We everyday folk might view it as a bathtub. There's nothing to be gained by leaving the taps on once the bath is full!

Come to think of it, the bathtub isn't such a bad analogy. The overflow outlet represents those who leave the site for whatever reason, and to keep the site topped up exactly to the brim the taps will have to supply just enough water to compensate for the outflow. Leaving the taps turned on full results in the bath overflowing the sides - that is to say, the site becomes unappealing through being overcrowded and the number leaving the site increases dramatically. Of course, it's not such a tidy situation because there are a thousand people in the bath, making splashes and waves that slosh water out...

After all that waffle, my point is that we have to find a way to alter the structure of the site so that it can comfortably accommodate more people. The answer might be as simple as just limiting the number of submissions, maybe to one a day, or maybe to a weekly limit. This might push the equilibrium point up to (say) 1500 users. To really make more space on the site... well, any ideas?

Come to think of it, there are social considerations too. While the site remains a small village you feel that you can know everybody, or at least the regulars at the pub. When it becomes a town, people will naturally divide themselves into smaller village-sized communities, if there's the infrastructure for them to do so. Currently there isn't!

Well, ABC would need to work what (if anything) it's selling, who it's selling these things to and who else is selling similar things to similar people (and for how much). And any other relevant factors in the market.

So, for example, ABC could decide to sell a writing critiquing service - as has been suggested on here recently.

Currently these service are mostly offered to people who are looking to take their writing up to publishable standard.

Within that there's the general market (these providers are two examples of existing provision) - http://www.literaryconsultancy.co.uk/ - and more specific markets - http://www.poetryschool.com/?tutorials=1

If ABC is going to compete with existing providers for the same customers it would need to have a clear idea of the basis it would compete - price, quality of service etc.

If ABC was going to provide the service to new customers, it would have to be clear about why these customers would want ABC's service when they don't want the existing ones that are on offer.

A key complicated factor in this market is subsidy which both the providers I've linked to get a lot of.

Obviously, while considering these issues, you also have to be considering how you're actually going to deliver the service and how much it will cost you to do so.

"Is 'web-based writing community' a market in its own right?"

It's a market in the sense that there are different web-based writing communities that people can choose between.

But then, on that basic level, 'which pair of socks do I put on today' is also a market in that it's a choice.

The question is whether online writing communities are likely to benefit financially from being chosen by users, any more than the socks benefit financially from being put on your feet.

As a free community that doesn't sell services ABC doesn't benefit financially from increased use.

'Paid for web-based writing community' would be a market but I don't know whether it's a big enough market to be worth worrying about.

Suffice to say that I am following this discussion with great interest and taking it all in.

There are two way of looking at this. If we had a community of 100,000 in which there were 20,000 active writers and the rest occasional respondents then we would have to split the site into a number of easily recognisable 'villages'. The obvious way to do this is by genre. This would make the site a valuable advertising tool and would attract attention from the larger social networking players.

That may well not be possible as there may not be that many people willing to participate in such a way.

On the other hand a community of 4-5,000 active members paying £10 per annum would allow one to provide a reasonable level of service and make the site attractive to some advertisers.

These are the two essential routes to success and we are not close in either form, which, after 10 years, is worrying.

My preferred route has always been the free one - I want to encourage creativity in as large a way as I possibly can - but maybe that is just a pipe dream.

I would just like to clarify FTSE's assertion that the membership number on the front page is false. It isn't. That is the number of registered members we have. Some haven't been hard from for many a long year but they are still members and could, in theory, return. Over recent weeks I have had communication from around 30 old members who have returned to the fold - it does happen, but, admittedly, not enough.

Of more interest to me is the phenomenon of the person who arrives, loads up material for a few days and then departs never to be seen again. I do find that a bit odd.

I suspect a lot of people find the site, post the masterpieces they have been lovingly nurturing for years, are disappointed not be immediately hailed a genius and lose interest.

I know that's what happened to me (apart from the losing interest bit).

I think maybe people expect comments and when they don't receive them, disappear off to somewhere else.

I still maintain that make or break is on user participation and a welcoming site. I suppose if you could build up a team of regular editors again, who had as part of their responsibilities a commitment to comment on anything they cherry pick, that might encourage others to follow suit. (they could also welcome new people to the site, etc etc). A toned down version of what Mark used to do so well.

Some way of pointing users to 'recently commented on' would be great - a quick way to see where the buzz is. As a reader, I want to read the good stuff, and want to be able to get to it easily. As a member of the community, I want to be able to join in with lively discussion on what works and what doesn't in a piece. Currently, the latter isn't easy to find.

As I've said, after this week I'm off work for quite a long time, and will gladly pick up a good chunk of the editing. But a team of half a dozen regular editors, regularly commenting, would be a good step forward I think. Perhaps a recruitment drive is called for? After all, ABC volunteers cost nothing - there aren't even overheads.

Yeah, kind of crossed posts with Dan, but that's my point too. And there's always the few who just want to see comments like: OMG!!1! LOVED IT ;) ENZO FTW!!1! GRATZ ON CHERRY w00T! and so on.

And yes, this post *was* just a thinly veiled excuse for the internet speak. As you were.

In reply to FTSE's earlier ask on the value needed for a prize to really cause a stir - I think the answer is £10,000 for a short story.

However this would need to be trebled in order to pay 'top' judges and market the prize effectively. Maybe we could live without the literary names on the judging panel but we would need people with real integrity behind them - and they would still need some funding as it's a lot of work. So, all in all, back of envelope stuff I would say about £25k would get you a good literary prize with a shedload of entries.

"always the few who just want to see comments like: OMG!!1! LOVED IT ;) ENZO FTW!!1! GRATZ ON CHERRY w00T!"

I'm increasingly of the opinion that, on a social writing site, those are the best comments to have!

Writing useful crit is an art in itself and few people do it well. But any number are willing to give it a go and the results aren't pretty.

I think any volunteer editor would have to be a well respected contributor on the site. I would also prefer that they have some kind of portfolio of published peer-reviewed , selected work (that is they have appeared in selective anthologies or magazines or won competitions) Useful crit is indeed an art but if people fulfill those criteria, I am sure they can say i) What (if anything) was good about a piece ii) tactfully highlight any weakness and iii) make concrete suggestions for improvement

One problem is that people invite crit and what they really mean is 'tell me how good I am', when such people seldom are.

jude

One of my favourite books is Michael Frayn's 'The Trick Of It'. Academic marries author. Academic knows all there is to know about writing but can't write. Author knows nothing about writing but writes with great success. Academic is convinced that he will be able to deduce 'the trick of it' and write himself. No happy ending.

"One problem is that people invite crit and what they really mean is 'tell me how good I am', when such people seldom are."

Yes, yes, yes. I would go further. To paraphrase another member of the site, 90% is dross. Is that too harsh? Maybe, but in my experience, if you find 1 piece in 10 is a thoroughly good read, you're doing okay. That isn't to say that there's a load of stuff that could be made into a good read - and it's the editors job to tease the goodness out.

However, I don't entirely agree that editors should be required to be good writers themselves. I think if people can offer good crit, that stands as a skill on its own - I'd happily take criticism from someone who is an awful writer, but is good at the three criteria you idenify.

I think Enzo is right, you don't necessarily have to be a terrific writer to be a reasonably effective critic. I suggest Jude is practising contra-airflow micturation if she thinks there is a horde of writers on here with the kind of portfolio she proposes. There are some, but they aren't necessarily likely - or obliged - to provide this service for nothing.

Lots of the regular folk on here, myself included have had bits and pieces published or had some recognition in competitions (vanity and self publishing excluded). It isn't difficult if you have a reasonable level of requisite talent and are prepared to work on your writing, revise and accept criticism. It is true that you don't need to write to give good critique, but there it seems easier to get potential editors to demonstrate their writing rather than thinking of ways they can demonstrate their critiquing skills.

jude

Perhaps. I won't bother offering my services then.

I did say "I would also prefer ..." rather than "I would absolutely insist"

jude

Yes, I understand where you're coming from, it is an easy way of judging suitablility, but I'm still not convinced it's the right measure. You'd be better off doing some kind of up front assessment - send a couple of pieces to a prospective editor, get them to comment and see what the quality is like.

But anyway, the important point for me is that as a minumum all cherried peices should get crit, even if it's just a paragraph. Really, I think anything that's decent or has promise should get some kind of contructive comment from the editors. But that's quite an ask if only one or two are editing.

Interested to hear Tony's views, too.

Yep, an up-front assesment might be better. The crit has to be good otherwise it is *almost* worthless. A lot of the comments I get on my work here are very nice and very encouraging but they do not help me grow and improve my writing. Sometimes I get a contructive comment and this is helpful to some extent but having paid to do a city lit poetry course with John Stammers (and it was very good) I realise you get what you pay for. A lot of the people who can give strong editorial feedback can't afford to do so for nothing.

Is "very nice and very encouraging and sometimes helpful" going to be enough?

jude

But how many people using this site are here for such earnest, worthy reasons?

On another writing site there is an option to select the level of crit you want. One option is advanced crit, for those who (from memory but pretty accurate) 'want to bring their writing up to publishing standard'.

What shite, as macjoyce might say.

There seems to be an idea in people's minds that they aren't published because they've used too many adverbs, or have told instead of showing, or whatever. There's the idea that the way to get published is to do your homework, polish your piece to a certain academic level, and as soon as you have reached the requisite standard and passed your exams, agents will beat a path to your door.

Complete fantasy, as I might say.

Polishing your poems and primping your prose is just another game that writing enables you to play. Some people enjoy it; most don't. It isn't virtuous, it's just a game. It's no more worthy than football or chess. Play it if you like it; don't if you don't. Some people just like pushing the pieces around - there's no obligation to study Modern Chess Openings once you've learned the moves.

Don't force crit on others on the basis that it's medicine and will do them good in spite of themselves, and that if they don't want their medicine they don't have the right to write!

I don't agree. On this site it isn't forced like medicine, it's a core service:

"...The site where you can explore and develop your creative writing skills, get support from our editors, publish your short stories and poems online, get feedback and writing tips and meet fellow writers, all for free."

Other than "publish..online", every line in that statement requires some form of crit.

Surely if you read that but didn't want crit, you'd go elsewhere?

Open immediately! You could have won a million pounds!

It's all in the 'can', isn't it? It doesn't say you're obliged to! Oooh, I've come over all subjunctive, madam.

Between ourselves (there's nobody listening, is there?) I wish it were that simple. I wish I could take one of my pieces, improve it according to some abstract principle or other, and have it published. We all know that ain't gonna happen.

Look at the stuff that actually is published. Dan Brown could barely pass a GCSE. Is he an exception? I think not.

So, if it isn't going to help you get published, what is it for? It's something you can enjoy for its own sake, so long as you're the kind of person who likes that kind of thing.

"There's the idea that the way to get published is to do your homework, polish your piece to a certain academic level, and as soon as you have reached the requisite standard and passed your exams, agents will beat a path to your door."

Well, there's published and published. I mainly write poetry and you could count on the fingers of one hand the living poets in this country who could make a living from it. Most of us are content with the odd piece here and there in one of the more widely acclaimed magazines. Over the past 3 years, I have made the grant total of £770 from writing - a £500 first prize, a £100 runner up prize, £100 from an American magazine and 2 x £10 payments from uk magazines and I consider that a success. I achieved that by doing exactly those things you mention.

If people think they're going to land some kind of big deal, they misunderstand the market. I can't speak for writers of fiction/ novels as it isn't something I do but I would expect elevating writing to a certain standard, though guaranteeing nothing in terms of commercial success, is a good goal to have.

I agree with Enzo about critique. As Liana once said, if you don't want crit and just want people to say how lovely your stuff is, then keep it in a notebook to show friends and family.

We have discussed the possibility of having options for 'no crit', 'basic comments' and 'advanced crit' which I think UKA has. But I believe anything less than robust critique is a waste of time, so there should be just 'no crit' and '(advanced) critique' options only.

It isn't all in the 'can' at all. That makes no sense.

"But I believe anything less than robust critique is a waste of time, so there should be just 'no crit' and '(advanced) critique' options only"

Agree completely.

Jude, you are 100% right - for yourself. That's the way you like it, so that's what you should strive for.

Now put yourself in the position of Eric Spoons. He just writes verse about the things in his life that he loves. His poems talk about his family, his feelings about his life, his sorrow at the death of his mother. It uses simple rhyming schemes, it doesn't scan, but Eric isn't really a poet, nor does he ever expect to be one.

Eric wants to hear from other people who share his feelings. He doesn't know whether his lines have masculine or feminine endings, or whether he is writing in trochee or in good rice pudding, he's just a simple guy with simple hopes and expectations. He is 90% of the people on this site.

Don't try to convince me, please tell me what you'll say to Eric.

Send for NWB, I think you'll find his critical faculties robust enough. He is rarely wrong, but even among those with the advanced critique option selected he would be unlikely to promote a rapid upsurge in membership.

In rare moments of niceness, I have given crit to a few Erics on this site, when they have requested it or bemoaned the lack of forthcoming comments.

I always say it has potential (everything does) but does not appeal to me and to improve it he needs to do x, y and z. They have always thanked me and never walked off in a huff.

Unlike here!
http://www.abctales.com/forum/2006/05/31/refuge---unfinished-by-maisie

jude

"Don't try to convince me, please tell me what you'll say to Eric."

Hi Eric.

If you don't wish to recieve criticism of your work, please tick the appropriate box when you submit the piece. People will still be able to make comments, but will be aware that you are not interested in receiving a formal critique.

Cheers, Ben.

Wow - I forgot all about that, Jude.

Cor blimey I wish Liana, Fergal, Rokkit and Spack (among others) were still posting regularly. And Andrew Pack, who once wrote a crit longer than the piece I submitted. Amazing.

Well, water under the bridge. There are still people like that here, and many more out *there*, in the big scary world. This still is a great forum for discussing writing.

I enjoyed that thread from the past!

The poem was terrible, or at least not worth a cherry to me. Maybe an editor thought it showed improvement over other efforts?

Hmm... maybe it might work as Enzo says, until the next time.

Don't worry, I'm guilty as hell myself. I have been needlessly sharp about other people's writing when too overloaded with editing (that's my excuse, anyway) and too frustrated to do otherwise. I'm not proud of it and wouldn't want to see it institutionalised.

My view is biased because I'm an instinctive writer. I rarely want to revise a piece once written - it is the way it is because that's the way it came out.

A few of my pieces are factory-made items, but for the most part I just feel like writing, begin, carry on until it seems to have ended, press the 'submit' button, and go on to the next piece.

Now I've admitted that, I suppose I'm no longer fit company? I'll get my coat...

A bit naughty admitting to that! I rarely recognise what (if anything) of mine is that elusive thing 'good'. I do know that it's more likely to be better using the 'spew' method above. Occasionally, something I go back to again and again will improve, but mostly it's just polishing turds.

If I do offer some criticism, I am often polite and perhaps a little too indirect for some. The fact is I don't really know anyone on here well enough to be brutally honest, so I'm not. That said, if I do attempt something more than a proof-read, I do try to help, but who am I to assume I have the right to do so?

It is water under the bridge and as I have said elsewhere, people move on with their lives and I think forums are now a mature product having past the meridian.

There are, as you say, still people like Liana, Fergal, Rokkit , Spack, Andrew Pack (and I would add Fish and Neil the Auditor), on the site and I am grateful for the work FTSE and Wilky have put in recently, but I fear we no longer have a critical mass.

Maudlin nostalgia, I know, but I would also really enjoy a knees up in London Town. A night at Extra Time with good readers, loads of booze, just like this - http://www.abctales.com/node/141637

j

No false modesty please, Ewan! You write well and you know it!

In my opinion you are the person most qualified to comment on the work of others. First of all, you don't believe you know it all (even if you do); secondly, I have never known you to be anything other than polite; thirdly, your comments are useful. You can crit my pieces anytime!

Heh - before my time, but many names I haven't heard in a long while. Lovely. And yes, I shouldn't have fotgotten Neil and Fish. Drew too, now I think of it.

Do you really not think it's possible to bring in a new crop? Or motivate the current lot (including some of us on this thread) to get more invovled? I still feel like there's room for optimism on this site... is that naive?

These are the good old days. Just wait and see!

(I pinched that. Too embarrassed to say who from.)

"I think forums are now a mature product having past the meridian."

Btw Jude, 'passed the meridian', perhaps? Just getting my eye in for the crit...

I am not faulting the quality of current members, it is a quantitative problem. I would guess there used to be a core of 20 - 30 regular forum posters (that is people who contributed to several threads every week) with many more on the periphery.

The question you rightly ask is whether we can bring in a new crop of regulars. I think we need to find out why the old regulars moved on as that may hold some answers.

Optimism, yes but tempered with realism!

jude

'passed the meridian'

I didn't know (I have a problem with past and passed) so I asked the person who sits behind me and has a degree in English. I blame her entirely and will let her know she's doomed to fail.

jude

Don't worry, you could have corrected me too - from whom, not who from! I admire your restraint. ;)

I think if we're being honest most of us would like to get published. I know I would. Posting stories here is fun and rewarding but where are the hungry literary agents itching to get us to the next level? Living it up in Tuscany most likely.

Dan Brown! Pam Ayres! C'mon, publishing has nowt to do with quality!

Publishing is something to do with quality, just not entirely.

Hah! The Dan Browns outnumber the Martin Amises by hundreds to one! I offer W.H.Smiths in evidence!

I'll add Katie Price's Autobiography. But quality is still important. I agree with Sting that the X Factor is just televised kareoke and whilst there is nothing new about manufactured bands (remember the monkees) it is now at a different level. But I disagree that this entirely crushes 'real' talent. I do believe that quality will win through even though it may be the trash that makes the biggest money.

JK Rowling and Dan Brown are anomalies. There are probably fewer multi-millionaires amidst writers than there are amidst lottery players expressed as a percentage. Most writers are content with being able to make a reasonable living and few can do this on book sales alone. I hope one day to write a book on bioethics for teenagers thinking about a career in medicine but I am not going to be able to retire on it.

The average advance for a first novel is is £5-10k and then you might get 10% royalties and sell 20k copies in pbk. Considering the amount of time it takes to write and draft and re-draft a novel, for all but the most fortunate few writers, it isn't particularly lucrative.

jude

I would also add that whilst Dan Brown and Pam Ayres can, on one level be considered 'trash' they are both good at doing what they're trying to do! Ayres is doing light-hearted comic verse and Brown, despite the groaning awfulness of his prose has a real knack with the thriller plot. I don't think this kind of trash (which I confess to having enjoyed in the past) is directly comparable to the dross on websites like ABC!

jude

I agree entirely, Jude. The satisfaction in having a 'literary' novel published is mostly in the recognition, the feeling of being a real part of the writing community. It must be - it certainly isn't in the bank balance!

I do wonder, though, whether John Fowles's facility with language was a result of suffering 'crit' or whether it was mere talent and hard work? Would he have benefited from posting on ABC?

I'm not sure Eric Spoons thinks of his work as trash. He's expressing himself as well as he can. Easy access to world-class quality in all the arts makes us contemptuous of anything that doesn't live up to those standards. Should we be? There's a pleasure in making a noise on musical instruments in your local pub, even listening to others doing it, that is far more exciting than listening to a perfect CD recording.

Since you bring up music as an analogy. I'm off tonight to pay a very nice lady more than I earn an hour to tell me what I'm doing wrong playing the violin. I have no ambition to ever get paid for playing the violin but I would like to do it well and I know from experience that I won't unless somebody who knows what they're talking about tells me what I'm doing wrong.

The same is largely true of writing.

Hell, I can't abandon Eric Spoons now, nobody else seems willing to stand up for him! It seems I'm in a minority of 90% so I'll withdraw and bash my joanna pianjelicum until my ears bleed.;)

Well, whilst Eric is welcome to post here, I don't think the site can and should offer what he's looking for. Eric wants to hear from other people who share his feelings, so he should perhaps post his poem on a bereavement newsgroup. If a teenager wants to pour her angsty heart out that she self harms and has an eating disorder, there are websites for that too. We are not an emotional support or recovery through writing network!
jude

Ooooh, you elitist! (When you run out of argumants, just bring out a Bad Word. That'll get 'em!)

Bad or good word?
Siphuncle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siphuncle
Can it be used as an expletative, to win an argument or in a poem; who cares? Eric might like it, I do.

It is a good word but not as good as peduncle.
The sessile barnacle has no peduncle, now there's a good first line.

jude

Hello!

Long time no see all!

Market research is a pretty simple task. You find everyone that you can that is doing something similar to what you're thinking of doing, then examine three things:

1)How many people they do their thing with and how much they charge

2)How they make their thing work

3)How your thing relates to their thing

Generally, your thing as a new thing will have to be a bit different to their thing otherwise people will have no reason to use your thing. Your thing might be exactly the same, but if it is you'll either have to be cheaper or better at advertising your thing.

Regarding Eric Spoons, the practice of critiquing is always about trying to help a piece of work be the best it can be, within the terms set out by the person who is making it.

If the person wants to write a novel and be famous, then they need to know that their lack of thought about dialogue or their poor grammar stands in their way of getting to that stage.

Similarly, if a person wants to get their poetry published, they need to know if their poetry stands up well against other poetry that it will be in competition with for space in magazines or anthologies.

There is no getting away from the fact that the skill of being able to enter into the process of being critiqued is a necessary one if you want to grow as a writer.

Writing is a craft, not just inspiration.

It isn't elitist to want to help people get better at writing. It's trying to help them to develop their craft to a point where they can achieve the things that they want to achieve by their writing.

That's how you judge. The difficulty is that people often get confused about what they want to do with their writing, so the skill is guiding them gently and respectfully toward developing and bettering their work.

The worst thing you can do is set someone up to fail by telling them their work is brilliant, then sniggering at the fact that someone with less time and less interest in making sure that they aren't ripped to shreds than goes ahead and does just that.

Critiquing involves the principle of charity, and assuming that someone is trying their best and is trying to do what they say they're trying to do.

I enjoy critiquing and trying to give people a hand to find a way off the plateau of 'my friends say I should publish it' onto the foothills of 'I've got something here, but I'm really going to have to work at it to get to the top of where I could be with it'.

I miss having the chance to do that sometimes.

How're you all keeping?

Mark

Hello Mark

As usual, enviably clearheaded and sensible.

This should be the new motto of the site when it comes to commenting on others' work:

"The practice of critiquing is always about trying to help a piece of work be the best it can be, within the terms set out by the person who is making it."

You are missed.

Ben

Indeed he is - but the harking back to the 'good old days' also harks back to the time when there were three or four full time employees. Now there is just me on an unpaid basis doing this when I can in between trying to eke out a living - this should no be forgotten!

Extra Time is no more and I am rarely up in London - I'd love to do another London bash but it needs organising and we have to find somewhere suitable that won't charge us money - they get to keep the bar takings and we keep the entrance money. It needs to be relatively central and near a tube station - these places are not easy to find but if anyone knows of one then we should have an evening in January. I'm happy to sort out readers etc.

I think that people do come and go. It's always sad when someone who has put a lot of time and effort into the site moves on but it seems that nothing is for ever - most of them pop back from time to time but it seems that the ABC 'thing' lasts between two and three years for most people - it's just me and jude who are here from the beginning, I think!

We do desperately want to develop and grow - and The Big Issue was good in that respect but we can't expect that every month! I am now in discussion with a group of people on a Student Writer of the Year prize which, if it comes to anything, will bring us to the attention of everyone on a creative writing course in this country and that should bring in a wealth of excellent new writers. But these things take time and effort and that, inevitably, is limited whilst I run this on my own with magnificent help from FTSE, David K, Ewan and others - most of them on this thread.

There are a number of bars that would give free hire dependent on a minimum spend. The minimum spend would be higher on a Friday or Saturday. What was the minimum spend at Xtra time so I can use that as a benchmark when making enquiries?!

jude

...

This event could possibly be a 10th birthday event and hopefully bring together as many regulars past and present as possible. We can reach some of the oldtimers via Facebook.

Do people think this is a good idea? Would you come? How much can you drink?

There was no minimum spend midweek - which is why we went for then. But for a 10 year bash it'll probably be best on a Friday or Saturday or the out of towners will moan!

The main thing is to check that the acoustics are OK - there's nothing worse than trying to listen to someone reading and all you can hear is the thump of the music and the braying of the crowd in the bar.

"Extra Time is no more and I am rarely up in London - I'd love to do another London bash but it needs organising and we have to find somewhere suitable that won't charge us money - they get to keep the bar takings and we keep the entrance money. It needs to be relatively central and near a tube station - these places are not easy to find but if anyone knows of one then we should have an evening in January. I'm happy to sort out readers etc."

I recommend the Cross Kings (http://www.thecrosskings.co.uk/) or the Green Note (http://www.greennote.co.uk/).

Have had more than 90 at midweek literature events at both in the last year - it's a bit of squeeze at the Green Note.

Both would be available free midweek (on the basis of decent bar income). Unlikely to be free for weekend.

Ooh - they look good - thankyou. I shall check them out.

I had no idea you'd had events at The Cross Kings, David. I would have come along. I work just around the corner on Pentonville Road and absolutely love that pub. I get down there as often as I can convince people to join me, or just sit outside with a book by myself if they won't.

I can't praise it enough.

Ben

I help to organise this:
http://www.utterspokenword.com/news/?page_id=2