Pseudopod 209: Corvus Curse

[Alasdair5000]

Wow, thanks for sharing your thoughts, Sanguine, and for the suggestion of the last line, I like it. It carries much more meaning and impact, and is more sympathetic to the mc. I'm tempted to suggest the edit to the original editor Mark A. Crittenden, who is including the story in a new revision of the original Howl anthology for the fledgling Red Skies Press.

It seems no-one likes the last line so far, I wonder if there are any who do?

I do:)  Longer thoughts on the way, but the last line did work for me.

[Unblinking]

I think "Any day" would be better, because the profanity did seem a bit out of place.  But even then it still felt like it was overexplaining the character that I already felt like I understood very well.  But, well, you certainly don't need to heed my comment, especially since I don't have any particular ideas for how to best end it.  Endings are one of the hardest parts of writing a story, and I'm not sure what best fits here--especially since the curing of his curse by her suicide seemed to go against the rest of the story.

[Zuishness]

I liked the last line.

I thought the mother's decision to kill herself to remove the curse might have represented the skew-whiff reasoning that lies behind a parent's decision to kill themselves. The fear that their presence has such a negative impact upon their children, that by removing themselves from the picture they would somehow make things better.

So heartbreakingly wrong, and a mindset I truly hope to never understand.

I thought the last line was lovely. I felt like it was a boy angrily expressing that he'd rather have had his mother in his life, no matter what kind of burden she may have become. I must confess it made me cry.


Edit- Having "every day" as the final line leaves the danger of having people mentally visualise Toni Collette's painful over-acting, (and vile acrylic nails,) in 'The Sixth Sense.'

[BarryJNorthern]

Thank you Zuishness, I'm glad the story moved you, and that you picked up on the twisted logic of suicide.

[Unblinking]

I liked the last line.

I thought the mother's decision to kill herself to remove the curse might have represented the skew-whiff reasoning that lies behind a parent's decision to kill themselves. The fear that their presence has such a negative impact upon their children, that by removing themselves from the picture they would somehow make things better.

So heartbreakingly wrong, and a mindset I truly hope to never understand.

I thought the last line was lovely. I felt like it was a boy angrily expressing that he'd rather have had his mother in his life, no matter what kind of burden she may have become. I must confess it made me cry.


Edit- Having "every day" as the final line leaves the danger of having people mentally visualise Toni Collette's painful over-acting, (and vile acrylic nails,) in 'The Sixth Sense.'

I see the skewed logic of a mother's suicide in her decision to try to free him of the curse, but by having the suicide actually remove his curse, to me the story is saying that her logic was not skewed.  If the suicide succeeds in removing the curse, then the logic is not wrong, no matter how heartbreaking the result.  To me it would have been more true-to-life if she had thought that her suicide would solve everything, but it didn't.

[Scattercat]

Or if - as I was expecting - there was a hint that her suicide only delayed the onset of the curse for her child.

[Zuishness]

I see the skewed logic of a mother's suicide in her decision to try to free him of the curse, but by having the suicide actually remove his curse, to me the story is saying that her logic was not skewed.  If the suicide succeeds in removing the curse, then the logic is not wrong, no matter how heartbreaking the result.  To me it would have been more true-to-life if she had thought that her suicide would solve everything, but it didn't.

In my mind the curse doesn't go anywhere. It just mutates into something more humdrum, but no less horrible.

[birdless]

Until reading the forums, i thought she sacrificed herself. I didn't necessarily think of it being a selfish act, though that was clearly how the MC saw it. At any rate, their WAS selfishness in the mother's unwillingness to communicate with her son. For me, THAT was what caused so much damage, because it was an unanswerable question about whether it was a selfish act to end her own suffering or a sacrificial act to prevent her son from suffering. Obviously, the son would have, of course, been willing to suffer the agony of the curse himself to keep his mother around.

Oh, and i enjoyed the story, though i feel that's the wrong verb. It was very sad and tragic. Well-written. And, even though i rarely use the f-bomb, i thought it was extremely fitting to end the story with. It exposed the raw emotion of the MC that the rest of the story he seemed to try to contain.

[MIGHTY]

This story I liked ... especially the ending ... it was perfect. That's EXACTLY how a person in that situation would have spoken. We know now that the author spoke from personal experience and RIGHTLY so. This created an accuracy that gave the story more reality than the typical fantastic elements that naturally fill horror stories.

What I didn't like about the story itself, which I totally admit is just a personal preference, is the vagueness and ambiguity. As opposed to many others here, I would have LIKED to have known where the curse came from and why it was there. I also would have liked the end to have been spelled out better. Did she know she was preventing the curse from spreading? Did he know? Did it even really stop? I like clarity. I like things spelled out. I like my comedy nuanced but my horror OVERT and BLATANT. I don't want the inference of a stabbing; I want to see blood (not surprisingly, my favorite story on PP is "Bliss").

So, to the author, if you are reading this, can you clarify what you thought personally about any of the questions in the previous paragraph? I know the audience is free to decide, but I'd like to know what YOU were thinking. I know I am free to map out Middle Earth myself, but I'm only really concerned with how Tolkien saw it. I'm someone who feels the author's perspective is king. I didn't write the story and I already know I can create my own stories. I want to know what YOU think. Care to comment?

[Scattercat]

Somebody didn't read the forum guidelines.

I recommend a few spoonfuls of castor oil and ensuring you get regular doses of fiber in the future.

[Scattercat]

There's a difference between refusing to criticize and criticizing with tact.  If you'd actually read any of the previous threads, then you really couldn't say that everyone who posted that they liked this story has never posted negative remarks elsewhere.  (Well, you could SAY that, but then we'd laugh at you.)

I understand bananas and coffee also help.

[eytanz]

Ok, this looks like a good place for a word from a moderator.

MIGHTY - welcome to the forums. I strongly suggest that you follow Scattercat's advice and read the forum guidelines. Especially the part which says no insulting or trolling.

To make it clear - saying negative things about stories is fine. Saying negative things about fellow forumites is not. Starting and ending your very first post in the forums by collectively calling the forum a bunch of zombie flatterers is crossing the line (though everything you say that actually relates to the story itself is perfectly fine).

I'm looking forward to seeing you around these forums and reading what you have to say about the stories. I'm especially looking forward to learning from you how to be truly negative (while following the forum guidelines). But I do recommend that you follow the forum guidelines, if you don't want to be able to lose your ability to do so (By which I mean, of course, you may be banned. Or, you may get your fingers chopped off and fed to you one by one. These are the pseudopod forums, after all).

[Scattercat]

And I've read the negative comments. If your coffee was that weak, you'd send it back.

I don't actually drink coffee, and it's actually a funny story as to why-

Wait!  Shocking news flash!  We interrupt this comment to bring you this startling new development:

Scientists have found that criticism doesn't have to aspire to mockery in order to be effective or worthwhile!  The study also indicates that clear and well-explained criticism is received better and has a stronger impact.  In a further experiment, and against all expectations, polite and friendly people seem to enjoy themselves more and experience higher incidents of laughter and enjoyment.  The leaders of the study caution against taking any extreme actions based on these preliminary findings, however.

We now return you to your comment, already in progress.

- to this day, we're still not sure how the goat got inside the cockpit to begin with.

[Scattercat]

Starting and ending your very first post in the forums by collectively calling the forum a bunch of zombie flatterers is crossing the line (everything else in your post is perfectly fine).

Can I just say that the bit about how we were all whiny babies for objecting to the use of profanity was also kind of irritating?  Especially since there was actually considerable discussion about the utility and effect of the technique rather than blanket condemnation of profanity qua profanity.  If I'm going to be insulted, I'd at least like to be insulted accurately.

[eytanz]

Starting and ending your very first post in the forums by collectively calling the forum a bunch of zombie flatterers is crossing the line (everything else in your post is perfectly fine).

Can I just say that the bit about how we were all whiny babies for objecting to the use of profanity was also kind of irritating?  Especially since there was actually considerable discussion about the utility and effect of the technique rather than blanket condemnation of profanity qua profanity.  If I'm going to be insulted, I'd at least like to be insulted accurately.

Sorry, I guess I was unclear - when I said "everything else in the post is fine", what I meant was "everything to do with the story itself" is fine. None of the, um, "discussion" of other forumites was done in an acceptable manner.

[Bdoomed]

Let me start by saying that Scattercat and eytanz basically said a few things I'm about to say.  MIGHTY, you might want to listen to them.

First off, if there's a horror story to be had anywhere near these forums, it's the sight of zombies mindlessly adoring every single story that gets posted here. It is truly disgusting, terrifying and abhorrent. The few people who actually do have negative comments to say, do so with all the political correctness (read: falseness) of a say-anything-to-get-elected candidate. If the shoe fits, call a spade a spade and just say it sucked. Geez.

No, we criticize here with the consideration that everyone, author and forumites alike, is a person, not a mindless zombie.  We encourage criticism, as long as it is civilized.  Might I point you to our One Rule.

I hope I get bashed for these comments because at least then there'll be some life around here. It's like 29 Days Later in this piece.

Trolling, I see.  How mature.

It's made EVEN WORSE when the author shows up in the forum. For this reason, if for none other, I am against authors posting in the forums of their own stories.

Authors regularly come into forum discussions of their own stories.  Oftentimes, they are glad to hear the criticisms offered in the threads, because they do not come from complete black & white, "it was great or it sucked" assholes.  It also allows those of us who really enjoyed the story to say so directly to the author, and perhaps request more information on upcoming stories or other stories by the author.

Now that that's been said ...

Oh, so now that you've established yourself by insulting everyone on these forums and making their opinions obsolete, you can now tell us what the right opinions are?  Thank you, because with out you, we were all wallowing in sheer ignorance of our sad predicament.  Thank you for bringing fire to us, for now we may rise out of disgrace and stupidity and build a new world with which to be dicks to anyone and everyone.  Civility be damned!

This story I liked

Oh hey!  An opinion without being an asshole!

, except for the ending. No, not the ending written by the author ... the ending comments written here by people on this forum. "Ohhh noooo, I didn't like the swearing! Oh heavens, it ruuuuuined it for me! It snapped me out of the moment. Waaaah!" Boo hoo. Get over yourselves.

Oh, wait... nevermind.  Apparently, only your opinion is right.  Those of us who were thrown out of the story by the swearing are just wrong.  We shouldn't have been jarred by it negatively.  Again, thank you for telling us that our opinions are wrong and that only yours are right.  (for the record, since I have not yet commented on this story, I did personally like the cursing at the end, but that doesn't make my opinion right and everyone else's wrong.)

So let's see, so far you are breaking parts 1 and 2 of our one rule!  Part one: be civil; Part two: and respectful.  I see none of that here so far.

It was perfect. That's EXACTLY how a person in that situation would have spoken. We know now that the author spoke from personal experience and RIGHTLY so. This created an accuracy that gave the story more reality than the typical fantastic elements that naturally fill horror stories.

Oh hey an opinion!  Too bad it is in the middle of "I'm right and you all are wrong" because otherwise, this would be something that people might actually discuss!

What I didn't like about the story itself, which I totally admit is just a personal preference, is the vagueness and ambiguity. As opposed to many others here, I would have LIKED to have known where the curse came from and why it was there. I also would have liked the end to have been spelled out better. Did she know she was preventing the curse from spreading? Did he know? Did it even really stop? I like clarity. I like things spelled out. I like my comedy nuanced but my horror OVERT and BLATANT. I don't want the inference of a stabbing; I want to see blood (not surprisingly, my favorite story on PP is "Bliss").

Thank you for consistently using caps lock to highlight the various words that we, as mindless EA forumites, would never have noticed otherwise.  But again, an actual comment that could be discussed if not for the overwhelming dickishness of the post as a whole!  Congratulations, you might have potential here on our wonderful forums of mindless zombies and complete idiots.  You just need to clean up your act quite a bit.

So, if the author is going to be here, if you are reading this, can you clarify what you thought personally about any of the questions in the previous paragraph? I know the audience is free to decide, but I'd like to know what YOU were thinking. I know I am free to map out Middle Earth myself, but I'm only really concerned with how Tolkien saw it. I'm someone who feels the author's perspective is king. I didn't write the story and I already know I can create my own stories. I want to know what YOU think. Care to comment?

Wait, I thought you hate authors commenting on their own stories.
Also... stories, art, music, etc, are all up to the interpretations of the audience.  Ray Bradbury insisted that Fahrenheit 451 was about the stupidity of television (that is a very condensed statement and I don't claim to have said that correctly), while the majority of the intellectual world teaches it as about censorship and dystopia.  Who is to say that we should only learn the book by the author's idea?  Who is to say that we see a piece of art the same way the painter saw it?  Our experience of a story is our own, and we can do with it what we will.  An author can only do so much to direct that experience.  But this is quite another discussion, for another thread, and your opinions are just as valid as mine.  If you want, you can start a thread elsewhere, maybe in The Writing Forum or Gallimaufry if you would like to see this discussion expanded.  (See?  I'm not disregarding opinions here!  Wow it wasn't so hard!)

To the rest of you, for the love of Clive Barker, pretend you're in a horror forum and stab a little. This isn't a forum for grieving widows, after all.

Aww and we've come full circle back into the land of trolling and douchebaggery.  Let me now be clear, clean up your act or I will ban you.  This is strike one.  There might or might not be a strike two or three.  This is Pseudopod, after all.  We don't have to abide by the three strike rule.  *evil cackling*

It is all well and good to disagree with the opinions of others on these forums, but to attempt to render them invalid is strictly prohibited.  It is also all well and good to dislike a story and say so, but to ignore tact and respect is strictly prohibited.  You either follow these rules or you are out.

Somebody didn't read the forum guidelines.

I recommend a few spoonfuls of castor oil and ensuring you get regular doses of fiber in the future.

Wait!  Shocking news flash!  We interrupt this comment to bring you this startling new development:

Scientists have found that criticism doesn't have to aspire to mockery in order to be effective or worthwhile!  The study also indicates that clear and well-explained criticism is received better and has a stronger impact.  In a further experiment, and against all expectations, polite and friendly people seem to enjoy themselves more and experience higher incidents of laughter and enjoyment.  The leaders of the study caution against taking any extreme actions based on these preliminary findings, however.

Scattercat, I love you.

[Bdoomed]

now it seems as though actual people are posting here.

Back to insulting our forumites, I see.  You've learned nothing.

With all due respect, using an undead qualifier in the midst of a generally spoken simile is a literary device employed to illustrate my point and not disrespectful or against forum rules.

However it was disrespectful, as we felt disrespected by it.  Therefore, it was against forum rules, and we rightly told you as much.  On a side note, 'undead qualifier' is an awesome way of describing it.

My simple point is that I find the amount of adulation in this forum (which I've been reading for a long time but have only been motivated to post on because of the inundation of Kumbaya positivity) disproportionate, off-putting, phony and overdone. However, I fully acknowledge that this is just an opinion (and not at all an invalid or poorly expressed one, at that).

Oh so NOW you are acknowledging that it is an opinion!  See because before, we were just wrong and stupid.  Glad to see that things are different now that you are on your pedestal of respectful pity.

That said, neither creativity nor the exchange of ideas can flourish in an environment where everyone agrees and no one feels safe/encouraged to challenge or criticize. The stories will get better, the comments will get better, and PP will get better, when dissent is spoken.

Your view of dissent apparently widely differs from that of everyone here.  You see homogenization of opinion and lack of disagreement while I see a wide variety of opinions.  Distaste with the ending of the story was freely given in this thread, yet apparently that was just plain wrong to you, and therefore does not count as dissenting opinion.  Okay sure dude.

My main point is that I took up this mantle today in the hopes of seeing more of that kind of real human interaction.

Aaah, bettering yourself in respect to us again, I see.  Yes, thank you for guiding us to the land of more 'real human interaction', O Wise One.

Bdoomed

One word ... YES! (the caps were for you)

Now then, your comments here were far more insulting than anything I said, which leads me to either conclude that a) The rules are completely made up, 2) The rules are arbitrarily applied as the moderators see fit or III) You are soon to be banned.

Hmm, well I'd say there's an x) Moderators can act in any way they deem appropriate when acting as a moderator.  When I post as a fan of the podcasts, commenting on a story, I post with all due respect and civility.  When dealing with a troll like you, I feel no need to use such restraint.

I said nothing as profane even once as you did in your loquacious post on numerous occasions.

Oh snap, taking even more care to insult me.  That's smart.  That said, there is no rule against profanity.  And again, I feel no need to use such restraint in this situation.

And yes, as freethinking, intelligent adults, we can agree to disagree and nobody will melt. That really was the heart of my point and you helped me prove it swimmingly.

No, the heart of your point was that we are all dumb and wrong and over obedient, and that your opinions were right, and that we all disgust you.

That's the magic of public forums. I think people's objections to the swearing in the last line were overdone, uptight and short-sighted ... you disagree. Awesome! You think I'm prone to ... how did you put it ... *******baggery. I agree. WAIT, I meant disagree ... crap!

Hey, proving my point even more!  You ARE (oh hey, caps!  You should probably notice that word) prone to douchebaggery, as evidenced by this higher ground you are trying to take.

Anyway, now that I got my initial outburst out of the way, I can assure you that any further contentiousness on my part will be done with the utmost of respect. I do expect that my opinions will not always be well received, but they will be within forum guidelines.

We can sure hope so.  I don't doubt that you can offer many new opinions and arguments to our community, and I'm saying this without any sarcasm, I mean it with respect, honest.

[Scattercat]

Mighty, your point appears to the rest of us to have been, "You should be meaner."  The forums in general strongly discourage personal attacks.  Frankly, I was edging close to the line in my responses, but I have always been more prone to prickliness than this forum usually approves of.

It is possible to have a healthy discussion and disagreement without being mean or derisive.  "Spar" was a right donnybrook, but no one told everyone else they were wrong or stupid as you did in your very first post here.  This response?  The stuff we're doing here?  This is NOT good for a forum.  Catty remarks and one-upmanship is not a good thing for the public to see because it discourages people from voicing their own opinions.  If you want insult rap-battles, then by all means feel free to PM me and I'll let you have it.  I like a good word-fight, me.

But I DON'T try to have them in public, and I don't see where it's better for anyone if I do.  Yes, I can be witty and snide, but at what cost?  Generally, at the cost of people who are hesitant about speaking up ever saying anything.  It can reduce the already not-overflowing population to a few diehard regulars who carry on sniping and spewing venom at each other all they want.  I have moderated forums in the past; I have seen this happen.  

You want to save us from blandness, but what you find bland, others find quite palatable.  If you can't restrain your desire for flamefests, then push off.  If, instead, you wish to embrace the forums' ideal of polite, friendly discussion about the stories, then I'm sure you can settle into a comfortable position.  The salvation you offer is something everyone here has striven at some length and cost in time and attention to remove, and if that means you can't enjoy it here, then I respectfully suggest you find a new home.

[MIGHTY]

"Also... stories, art, music, etc, are all up to the interpretations of the audience.  Ray Bradbury insisted that Fahrenheit 451 was about the stupidity of television (that is a very condensed statement and I don't claim to have said that correctly), while the majority of the intellectual world teaches it as about censorship and dystopia.  Who is to say that we should only learn the book by the author's idea?  Who is to say that we see a piece of art the same way the painter saw it?  Our experience of a story is our own, and we can do with it what we will.  An author can only do so much to direct that experience."

-----------------------------------------------

To this I reply ... obviously. What you've said is self-evident.

But that is besides my point.

I am clearly aware that I can interpret anything any way I'd like. Furthermore, if I wish to write my own story, I'm free to do so. My point was that the creator of the art has a perspective that no one else does. If I'm taking the time to hear the author tell a tale, I'm obviously primarily interested in his or her view. If I were interested in my own view, I'd tell myself a story and no outside author or tale would be necessary. I want to know what the author was thinking, and, since the story belongs to the author, I believe that the author's perspective on the story is king. I don't think anyone else has the ability to say better than the author what the story is or is supposed to be about. I believe this equally with all forms of art. I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion but, when it comes to the actual message being communicated by the art, the only rightful call belongs to the author. This is why a book club will say, "I believe the author was trying to communicate such and such" but the author says, "The meaning of the story is ________." We can only conjecture. The author can deliver the truth. I want the truth. I already know my opinion. And the opinions or guesses of others mean little to me compared to the definite words of the creator. This doesn't mean people can't have their opinions. It just means I value the opinions of the artist more and before all others. I want Bradbury, not the intellectuals.

[Scattercat]

1) The primary policy of the forum is to keep the discussion on the story, not on the participants in the discussion.  Your comments flagrantly violated that in multiple places.  If that was the best you could do after reading the forum guidelines, then the only conclusion I can come to is that you did not, in fact, read the guidelines and simply assumed what the guidelines were.

2) Sometimes, if no one voices disagreement, then that means no one has any serious points they want to debate.  The forums are for discussion our opinions and reactions; in most cases, the rule against making the conversation about anything but the story means that there's no real room to argue with someone's points.  If they didn't like the story, well, then that's their opinion.  If they can back it up with reasons, then they've made a good post.  The only room for posting a specific argument is if you feel someone is factually in error.  Otherwise, we post our opinions and sometimes react to others' opinions.

2a) Healthy disagreement is not the same as attacking other people or shouting them down.  It is possible to have a civil discussion without resorting to such tactics.  While I must be more mindful of my tone when posting on the EA forums than I would be on my personal blog, I have never felt unduly restricted here.

2b) Backhanded swipes at the moderators are not cool.  If you Godwin this thread, I will somehow find a way to ban you myself.

2c) Content-free posts are also discouraged, so if you have a violent negative reaction to a story but can't articulate specific flaws, then the pressure is primarily to not post at all.  Unpopular stories tend to simply accumulate very few comments rather than a dogpile of ranting critics.  You earn no points for style; making zingers and unkind jokes about the story is not the sort of thing we do here.

3) Regardless of your preferences for strong opinions, these forums are for everyone.  Many, many people are intimidated by sarcastic rejoinders and harsh reactions.  Most of the people who post on this forum are going to be people who listen to the podcasts, which means that they will not necessarily be hardened, savvy explorers of the reaches of the Internet, able to brave the swamps of 4chan and the boiling lava pits of the SA forums with panache.  The primary reason for the rule against harsh language and aggressive remarks is to encourage those sorts of people to post and voice their opinions.  This forum is for listeners to voice opinions, not for the Arbiters of Taste to engage in death-clashes until the One True and Right Opinion remains standing.

---

Regarding your comments on interpretation:

A text is created anew every time someone reads it.  This does not mean that there isn't a primary or obvious interpretation in some cases, but it does mean that no one interpretation can be held to be "the" interpretation.  Even the authorial opinion can only do so much.  Ray Bradbury says his book is about television, not censorship.  However, if you read the book, there is a clear and quite powerful theme involving censorship in the way the story unfolds.  Why discard that meaning if it's what seems to make the most sense to you?  History is full of examples of works of art that were made to do one thing, but found themselves much better suited to another. 

More interesting still, many stories created since literary theory really took off have taken advantage of this built-in ambiguity and created stories that were meant to be left to interpretation.  This can be a powerful technique when handled well.  Take, for example, one of my personal favorite PP episodes, "The Inevitability of Earth."  It's loaded with potential readings and interpretations, and the story changes with each lens you select and each filter you apply.  This is fascinating work for some of us.  Much of the joy of literature is the way the same text can speak to different people in different ways.  Any book club that tries to tease out what "the author" believes in a quest to find the "right" interpretation is, in my opinion, missing out on much of the best part of the art form.

You're not required to accept alternate interpretations, but denying that they exist or that they are as (or in some cases, as with some inadvertently racist stories, more) powerful as the intended interpretation is a bit head-in-sand, at best.  Once you've put your work out there, there IS no True Reading anymore.  As soon as someone other than you reads it, they interact with the text and their own biases, beliefs, and knowledge to create a whole new meaning, just as each one of us creates our own worlds through our perceptions and our (editable and highly edited) memories.  If your work is well-made and consistent, then hopefully most people will see the same thing you did, just as most of us see the same set of colors and the same physical outlines of shapes.  However, if your screed against television turns out to be a poetic discussion of censorship, you can't take it back, no matter how much you might want to.  It's out there, and other people are interacting with it in their own ways and coming up with their own readings.  I agree that it can be interesting to hear an author's perspective, and it certainly colors my own perceptions of a story, but authorial intent is far from the only (or best) way to read.

[Unblinking]

There's a difference between refusing to criticize and criticizing with tact.  If you'd actually read any of the previous threads, then you really couldn't say that everyone who posted that they liked this story has never posted negative remarks elsewhere.  (Well, you could SAY that, but then we'd laugh at you.)

I must admit that I had to giggle a bit at the comment about no one here posting negative comments.  VERY few stories here get no negative comments.

Would it be possible for some of this sub-thread about what is and isn't against the rules be split off to another thread and linked?  It's just not very interesting to read and has filled Barry's story thread with a bunch of very long and unrelated posts.

I, for one, like the forum rules here, and the fact that the moderators actually pay attention.  Most other story/magazine forums I've gradually lost interest in when trolls were allowed to run about and make a nuisance--the interesting discussion was eclipsed by someone picking fights for their own entertainment.  I like a story discussion, not a flame war.

[MIGHTY]

Scattercat,

I love the way your write. Your style and skill is just excellent.

[MIGHTY]

There's a difference between refusing to criticize and criticizing with tact.  If you'd actually read any of the previous threads, then you really couldn't say that everyone who posted that they liked this story has never posted negative remarks elsewhere.  (Well, you could SAY that, but then we'd laugh at you.)

I must admit that I had to giggle a bit at the comment about no one here posting negative comments.  VERY few stories here get no negative comments.

Would it be possible for some of this sub-thread about what is and isn't against the rules be split off to another thread and linked?  It's just not very interesting to read and has filled Barry's story thread with a bunch of very long and unrelated posts.

I, for one, like the forum rules here, and the fact that the moderators actually pay attention.  Most other story/magazine forums I've gradually lost interest in when trolls were allowed to run about and make a nuisance--the interesting discussion was eclipsed by someone picking fights for their own entertainment.  I like a story discussion, not a flame war.

I agree. The sub-conversation does not belong in this thread. I am going to remove all of my comments that don't directly address the story.

[Scattercat]

Uh, MIGHTY, usually what we do with stuff like this is split it into its own thread in the "About X" forum, where it can garner what little response remains.  Editing out comments is generally looked upon as a dick move, because you leave everyone else standing there swinging at shadows.

Not saying you're doing this to be a dick.  Just saying it's not really kosher to remove stuff after you get people irritated at you for it.  Unless a mod tells you to take it down 'cause it's offensive, of course.

IN RE complimentary remarks, I must remain politely bashful.  I am striving to become a professional author, and therefore I pay perhaps too much attention to even menial writing tasks.  I revise Facebook status updates, is what I'm saying.  Thank you for your kind words.

[Unblinking]

Uh, MIGHTY, usually what we do with stuff like this is split it into its own thread in the "About X" forum, where it can garner what little response remains.  Editing out comments is generally looked upon as a dick move, because you leave everyone else standing there swinging at shadows.

Not saying you're doing this to be a dick.  Just saying it's not really kosher to remove stuff after you get people irritated at you for it.  Unless a mod tells you to take it down 'cause it's offensive, of course.

IN RE complimentary remarks, I must remain politely bashful.  I am striving to become a professional author, and therefore I pay perhaps too much attention to even menial writing tasks.  I revise Facebook status updates, is what I'm saying.  Thank you for your kind words.

Yup, usually the moderators do that, but you live you learn.  I don't object to the conversation continuing about how people should comment on stories, I just think it is better suited to a thread devoted to the subject instead of a story thread.