I Walk East All Day by rokkitnite

I wasn't aware that any of the editors had EVER simply cherry-picked their mates Mykle...seems your imagination is getting a little over-active again!

So, you think that cudo is someone that the editor/s know simply posting under a different name? If it is then they certainly have me flummoxed because their writing style is like none I am familiar with. Sounds a bit like sour grapes or should I say cherry envy to me mate!

Oh FFS, Mykle. Cudo IS a new member. If work of Cudo's calibre *wasn't* getting cherry picked on this site, you'd be eagerly posting your oh-so-smiley asides that they weren't being recognised because they weren't part of some long-standing clique or other. Talk about can't win for sodding losing. Get a grip. Rokkit, loved the poem. Probably didn't understand it cos. I'm crap at poetry, but the sentiment or whatever it is, got to me.

It’s raining this morning, so I’m having my coffee in front of the pc – so I might as well reply to this. Ok, so as not to run the danger of ‘putting words in your mouth,’ Mykle: `In 4 days BBF has had 4 cherries and Cudo Cudo had 3.` BBF has just started writing again after a break. Cudo has just arrived. `Not suggesting they don't deserve them` So….. you don’t have a problem with them getting them then. ‘but it does seem like a change in policy.’ Giving out cherries for good writing? Or just giving out cherries on a regular basis? ‘I'd just like to see cherries used a bit more to encourage... not only for the best of the best (but for unusual pieces and personal bests too).’ So, the best of the best and unusual pieces and personal bests deserve cherries – so still no problem with those being given. Ok, Mykle, from your last post your point appears to be that over four days cherries haven’t been giving out ‘solely’ to encourage. Well maybe that is what you should have *said* instead of, ‘Congratulations on the cherry by the way! Good to see the new editors aren't just cherry-picking their mates :O)’ And ‘You're probably right, Camus, … I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Cudo Cudo started posting just as the editors changed.’ You see where the confusion lies, Mykle? I think those otherwise random statements came across as sarcastic. Which, of course, they were.

Ok, Mykle so from your posts you claim that the eds are only cherry picking their mates, lets see…as far as I know the new eds have been cherrying since around 23rd june so lets see a list of cherry picked since then. In reverse order…. BBF Antonyjucha Cudo cudo Rokkitnite Cudo BBF Cudo BBF Little ditty Bright eyes Bright eyes Nicola6 Sticks BBF Like A daisy girl Purplehaze Span Antony jucha Mcmanaman Gilbert Purplehaze Camus Antonyjucha Scout Spack Foster Antonyjucha Macjoyce Antony jucha Macjoyce Spack Spack Rokkitnite Poetjude Span Span Ralph Liplash Polidori Macjoyce Antonyjucha Antonyjucha Byrne Span Rokkitnite Antonyjucha AllyB Spartacad Antonyjucha Spartacad Ralph Mykle Span So you think that the new eds are 'friends' with all of these people? I'm pretty sure that none of them are friends with you so how did you get on the list? Perhaps you would like to explain to some of these exactly what it is about their work that you think does not deserve a cherry, because starting a thread on BBF's writing simply to be sarcastic is diabolical, any idiot can see by checking back that he has just started writing again. I am sorry that I defended you to Tony last week because quite frankly after this I can see why Missi and others have a problem with you, you are nothing but a trouble maker and the site would be a happier place without you!

I gotta say, in all honesty, I'm underwhelmed by the poem. I just don't think it's a style Tim has made his own yet - I think it's him trying to put on the 'serious poet' mask, and while he's ticked the checklist of technical elements (alternating short and long lines, flecks of specialist knowledge, detail, matter-of-fact voice,) I think it lacks the old X factor. And Mykle's got a point. I wouldn't have noticed anything, but for the list Camus just posted - clearly, those names that come up again and again are the same ones that are likely to feature in the magazine, and there's supposed to be a distinction. And while it's got nothing to do with 'friends'... how can I put this? It takes a particular kind of discipline, I think, not to have favourites. I think it's fair enough comment, for example, to suggest that Antony Jucha was cherried as part of a minor campaign to get everyone to read him.

Yes some of the names repeat, but there are 6 people cherrying, so, for example where Spacks name is listed 3 times, it is actually 2 different eds who have cherried him, the same with Rokkit, 2 diff eds...the ONLY writer cherried for each piece by the same ed is Antony Jucha, cherried by Tony.

Back to the poem - you're right, Jack. It certainly doesn't sound like Tim, I was really surprised. But it's brave to leave what you know you're good at and write something totally new. Could be a cherry for encouragement.

I don't think it's a question of editors picking their mates, I think it's more that ABCtales is a pretty small community. Even if we discount old people using new names that I don't know about, a small majority of stories on Camus's list are the work of people I've met in person and, therefore, are fairly long-term members of the ABC community. But I'm not really clear what the editors can be expected to do differently. Is Mykle suggesting that editors shouldn't cherry-pick work by people who've used ABCtales for a long time and are good at writing?

I agree with all that BBF says. The magazine sits aside. It should only represent the best stuff. It's intended to be democratic. Anyone can nominate 5 pieces - if you don't nominate, you can't complain about what goes in. If enough people nominate, what goes in will be representative of the majority view of the members of ABC. With the mag, if anyone has any general thoughts / comments (or, of course, nominations), email them to me or put them on the appropriate thread. I want it to reflect ABC, and so will, of course, take on board any practical suggestions - and thanks to those who have emailed me already. Ben

Rokkit, agree with the above. I never thought I'd see you write something like that, very different to what I've read of yours over the past year - and I very much enjoyed it.

Not sure about this one, Tim. There are choice lines here and there, and while I am soapbox shouter champion of the north east for not pretending there's a direct link to the poet's life, opinions or experiences through the poetry, it still doesn't feel like you wrote it. That sounds odd, but what I mean is it's distanced from your voice to the extent of feeling dislocated. I suck at explaining myself. I think Cade did it better. That said, it's definitely good to see you dipping into different styles, as a lot of your recent stuff has been comic/performance. Just not sure it came off this time. I can't find your hand in it. "I have a room for life at the Home for the Chronically Groovy."

The cherry policy is the same as it ever was, mykle - and it isn't going to change. I watch, very carefully, what is cherried by the Editors. I don't always agree - but that's only normal - but I have never found a case of 'mate cherrying' going on. It is a travesty to suggest it. The Editors put in a lot of time and effort on this site to make it better and better and I think that we should be very grateful to them. The new band are keeping up with the new material incredibly well, communicating with me and each other as we debate the odd point or two - and it's a very constructive time for us. I'm sorry that you have chosen to be so negative and hope that you will get behind us properly.

Hello folks. Hmmmmm, it's the old cherry / cronyism / favouritism debate isn't it? I think I'll put my responses as a list of numbered points, just so it's possible to separate them out: 1. The illusion of democracy There are two types of website or forum. There is the 'top down', which is run autocratically by an organisation or individual. You use their site, you accept their rules. If you don't like the rules, you move on elsewhere. There is also the 'bottom up', where it is the userbase that collaborate on producing something, deciding on future developments and playing a responsible active role. Generally 'top down' sites are far larger and more used the 'bottom up' sites, because when a 'bottom up' site gets to a certain size, it will run into problems that only an imposition of rules will correct. Also, 'top down' sites are run for financial gain or a particular purpose. There is a point where the illusory democracy (we're all equals on this site) has to be sacrificed to allow the website to become something that is actually moving towards a purpose (we're a writing website with these aims). No matter how much love you've given it over the years, it is for those who operate it to make decisions. In this sense, I disagree with Tony's exhortation for people to 'get behind' ABCtales. It isn't a political movement, it's a website to help people to find their way as writers. 2. Appointing your mates Any website that draws volunteers form it's own userbase will be accused of 'employing mates' or sycophants. It is not unreasonable for an organisation to give responsibilities to those people among its userbase that it feels are most in tune with what it is trying to do. 3. Responsibilities It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't position, being a volunteer drawn from the membership of a website. If you try to maintain the same position you always have as a member of that community it is unlikely you will be able to maintain an impartiality as required. If you strive for impartiality, you will be accused of being a sycophant or being in the pocket of the management. This is a heavy responsibility. As a volunteer you should be provided with guidelines and responsibilities as detailed as a job description for a paying job, and you should behave in the way you would if you had a paid responsibility. In some senses, when you become a volunteer you must give up your position as a user. You represent the organisation you work for, not yourself. 4. Confusion all round A bottom up site is not to be expected to achieve much aside for fulfilling the needs of those who are already members. A top down website must be able to provide strong clarification of purpose, so those who use it are clear about why they are there, what the purpose of things are and the rational behind policies and decision making, with the aim of bringing about some sort of outcome. At present there is confusion all round. A bottom up website should respond organically to the needs and requests of its userbase, answering questions, holding debates, being attentive. A top down website must provide the answers and make the decisions before its members ask, because it is making decisions in their best interest and the best interests of the organisation that sustains it. 5. Where to now? The big question. There seems to much bad feeling between various users of this forum, and representatives of the organisation that runs and maintains it, based on a deeply entrenched set of beliefs about what ABCtales actually is. Rather than standing at opposite side of a chasm and spitting at each other, throwing accusations and making unreasonable demands, it would be better to actually stop the posturing and turning up of old, well nursed grievances and express what you would actually like to happen and how you feel it might be achieved. This, I feel, is something that needs to done by all sides in this debate. Any way, as you can see, I still pop in from time to time to see how everyone is doing. It's quite disheartening to see that the same grievances are aired, with same lack of movement into the future. It's very easy to slip from trying to do something constructive to trying to redress a perceived hurt or injustice. This I feel is a part of the ABCtales story, for everyone involved, and one that needs to be ended for the next chapter to begin. Cheers, Mark Brown, a concerned literature devlopment enthusiast and aspiring writer (Formerly Editor of ABCtales.com)

Yes, I think it's generally quite positive at the moment. It would be a shame to let one or two nay-sayers overshadow the rest of the work that's going on, and the fact that the forums are once again becoming lively. There are a few new members recently that are settling in and, for the most part, I'd say it's all good. What tires me is seemingly arbitary pops at the management. Do we have a right to comment on the running of this site? Yes, of course. From what I've seen, Tony's always encouraged it. But my personal view is that if all you're going to do is moan, and not make practical suggestions for improvement, you may as well not bother posting anything at all.

I think this poem deserves a cherry. Two reasons 1) versatility 2) It is complete, succesful and transforming Mykle, pick your battles. Span

"Anyone can nominate 5 pieces - if you don't nominate, you can't complain about what goes in. If enough people nominate, what goes in will be representative of the majority view of the members of ABC." Um... I can complain about what goes in, if I so wish. Anyone can. Why should we ever concede to a 'majority view'? I should point out that I don't myself feel detached enough to vote for 5 pieces without feeling that I'd be voting for friends. What am I saying? There's no such thing as detachment - people always have odd reasons for liking what they like. For instance, every cat poem I've seen on this site in the last few months has been cherried. Coincidence? Nothing is so. Deliberate promotion of fellow cat-lovers? Hardly. Something in between. Similarly, nothing pleases better than mediocrity. A 'majority view' is always likely to be err towards the simple and safe. I'm not casting judgement on individuals' tastes - and some of the nominations I've seen are excellent poems - what I'm getting at is that no amount of protocols, policies or voting procedures will secure the administration from accusations of favouritism or misjudgement. You can never say 'our hands are clean' in any situation that relies, to an extent, on personal judgement, especially in a small community like this one. Practical suggestions for improvement? As long as you continue with such abstract agendas as 'promoting the best' or 'excellence', you're at the mercy of people whose idea of 'the best' differs from yours. It's only natural to try and root out/diagnose self-serving intentions if there seems to be any pattern to the selections. You can expect people to say, "Oh, they're just publishing such-and-such because they love such-and-such." You must be prepared to take that on the chin, or else you'll feel unappreciated and angry, and eventually give in. The only way to avoid it, as far as I can see, is to start out with a different agenda, and let the idea of excellence be inherent. If, for example, the agenda of a particular literary magazine is to promote, say, London writers, it cannot be accused of failing if it doesn't publish writers outside London. If the same magazine merely promised great literature, there would be rancour galore. So you could - I dunno - do each issue centered around a particular theme? If you read the guidelines to literary magazine submissions, you'll find a great many editors have evidently had to suffer complaints and accusations of lopsidedness, and have loaded their criteria with (sometimes aggressive,) warnings along the lines of, "We'll publish what we like, and make no pretence to being ultimate arbiters."

Yeah, that's the plan as far as I am concerned. After issue 1 it'll be editors decision - and, of course, that'll be swayed by member recommendations, which will still be welcomed. "Um... I can complain about what goes in, if I so wish. Anyone can. Why should we ever concede to a 'majority view'?" I didn't want to get into a debate about personal freedoms. I hate it when semantics come in, it's a distraction. OK, I expressed myslef badly. My point was, nominate if you want to contibute to the content. Don't if you don't. Bottom line: I think it would be good for ABC to have something that shows off the "best" of the site. I think it would be good for the writer in terms of a little exposure and feel-good factor. I think it would be good for the reader in terms of having some top-draw writing in a nice pdf format. I think it would be good for the site in terms of promotion. Re your point about 'the best'. I agree to an extent, and what I'm saying is 'the best in the eyes of those people who choose the pieces'. In the same way as Empire magazine's 100 top films are 'the best in the eyes of those poeple who voted in their poll'. All I can do is reiterate what I said in the original post I put up: I will not bias decisions towards aquaintances, neither will I accept others doing the same (not that I think they would). Lastly: "You can never say 'our hands are clean' in any situation that relies, to an extent, on personal judgement, especially in a small community like this one." Let me make this abundantly clear: My hands are not clean. I take full responsibility, for better or for worse. I am not trying to pass it onto others. I just thought that for a launch, it was a good idea to get as many people invovled as possible, and a good way would be to have a 'best ever' feature. Rant over Ben

I getcha, Enzo. Good plan. Thing I hate most about cherries is the way they make your sets look like a run of raggedy wastes of time interspersed with the occasional jewel. This is the best reason to be irritated at those who get them all the time - their sets look like some kind of plantation.

Why don't we just drop the cherry system? And just let the things stand.... Or do we need prizes? Chris

Look, as far as I can make out, there is writing that I think is brilliant, writing that I think could be brilliant and writing that I think is bad. I will make no apologies or excuses for that ( not that anyone was asking me to) And I would be a liar if I said otherwise. I like to see when someone has been given a cherry because they have improved within their own context. No, I dont think we do need prizes, but when I first started on abc I was thrilled and in turn not thrilled to recieve a cherry. I still do enjoy knowing when something works or not and value the system. Thats why I use the site. Personally. Writing is odd non? I hate to admit that I kind of agree with the Fry comment about poetry. Who ever just says to someone learning the piano, or starting to paint 'just express yourself, be free' I cant talk, so I dont really know why I am typing this, but in an ideal world I reckon everyone has the potential to be a good writer if they learn how, but for some people it is too personal and therefore sentimental to change. I am not saying that is not what writing is for, I wholeheartedly advocate the use of writing as therapy or persoanl voice, but in terms of this being a readers and writers forum, you cant just tell a story any old way and expect everyone to love it and for it to therefore get a cherry. Nothing works like that. I am not even sure there is a formula, just some things are good and some things not so good. I think everyone forgets that everyone on here wants to sincerely read good stuff that makes them go ooo and be all congratulatory. Rant over, sorry don't really know where that came from or even if it makes much sense. No dount it will incense. If you think I am being a loud mouthed fool, take comfort and humour in the fact that I just mis spelt my own username. Span