Comments that leave you shaking your head

[AlexFourways]

Today I received a 733 word critique of Cuckquean Cruuse. It’s like a college professor grading a paper. Even gave me a numerical score.

Here I curse my name blindness. There is a commentator with a name like Coservecritique*, who does that. From the few I have seen, worth reading if a bit dry! I wouldn't mind him dropping by on any of my stories!

*EDIT, silly me I should have looked. I see it was Stacnash, but I have seen him do the same thing. Still wouldn't mind a visit from him either!

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I just got Stacnashed! (I'm a 3-star author, apparently) They were actually very complimentary, telling me I'm a better writer than this lazy story (Only One Bed, Again!) portrays. Some complaints about clichés.

Thing is, that story was my attempt to write in a category that generally repulses me, and to see if I could write a I/T story that met my own requirements of vaguely in the real world, while pushing enough buttons for the general American and incest-loving audience to give it a red H. So yes, it's a slightly heavy-handed advert on behalf of the Scottish Tourist Board, but that was on purpose. And the intended audience liked it enough to rate it Hot, despite the siblings 'only having a one-night stand'.

Mission accomplished, in minimal effort. just as Stac noted.

I made the three star list as well for one of my least viewed stories. I find it odd she didn’t leave a comment.

 

[Lumiere_Amie]

Aha! The infamous Stacnash rides again! I've never had the pleasure of receiving one of her essays, but from what I understand, your average college professor will be much too time-poor to write like that, but will be a hell of a lot more objective. You can probably convince yourself of that by looking at her list of 1-2 star authors and seeing some of the luminaries who have been relegated there.

I think I feel honored ????? that someone would take the time to give extensive feedback.

 

[Lumiere_Amie]

Here I curse my name blindness. There is a commentator with a name like Coservecritique*, who does that. From the few I have seen, worth reading if a bit dry! I wouldn't mind him dropping by on any of my stories!

*EDIT, silly me I should have looked. I see it was Stacnash, but I have seen him do the same thing. Still wouldn't mind a visit from him either!

We authors always bemoan the lack of feedback, and then this! imagine if more readers did this. Would we appreciate it? Would it push us to become better writers? Or would it push us to give up? I suppose that depends on the feedback.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

We authors always bemoan the lack of feedback, and then this! imagine if more readers did this. Would we appreciate it? Would it push us to become better writers? Or would it push us to give up? I suppose that depends on the feedback.

Seriously, I would loooove such heavy detailed critique, positive or negative. Any writer should.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

Seriously, I would loooove such heavy detailed critique, positive or negative. Any writer should.

There are plenty of writers who turn off comments here. Some people who make a living writing refuse to read reviews, or even mail from readers, because they get so upset at criticism.

I'm with you, I appreciate it, but #NotAllWriters.

-Annie

 

[pink_silk_glove]

There are plenty of writers who turn off comments here. Some people who make a living writing refuse to read reviews, or even mail from readers, because they get so upset at criticism.

I'm with you, I appreciate it, but #NotAllWriters.

-Annie

I said should, not does.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I said should, not does.

Fair point.

-Annie

 

[Actingup]

Fair point.

-Annie

I think that Stacnash’s review of Annie’s ‘Wagered’ is a good example of the reasons why Stacnash irritates me. There may or may not be some valid criticisms in there, but it’s totally over the top in gratuitous negativity, including irrelevant declarations of how bored they were (nobody’s asking you to read this…). And that subjective, whining prattle is then dressed up in a fiction of being an objective review and added to a meaningless hit list that consists of other good writers being rated as the worst of the worst. I think that Stacnash is intending to be destructive and demotivating. Zero stars from me.

 

[NaughteeDragon]

I wonder how you get Stacnash’s attention. I’d love to get her take on a story. Better yet, I’d love to have her as a beta-reader. I’d pay for that.

 

[WCSGarland]

I wonder how you get Stacnash’s attention. I’d love to get her take on a story. Better yet, I’d love to have her as a beta-reader. I’d pay for that.

It would be interesting to know what gets noticed by Stacnash I think. I suspect it is partly the red H, because a lot of the stories that have been rated have the red H. You should contact Stacnash to ask for the beta read anyway.

 

[Erozetta]

I believe I got on their radar when I messaged them and asked them to please put their lists in order because it was bugging me that they weren't initially in a proper order. They've yet to review one of mine, but they did put my absolute worst story on a "to be read" list before making it private.

I am fairly certain there is no critique they can give me that I haven't already given myself, but the confirmation of my opinion would be welcomed.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I think that Stacnash’s review of Annie’s ‘Wagered’ is a good example of the reasons why Stacnash irritates me. There may or may not be some valid criticisms in there, but it’s totally over the top in gratuitous negativity, including irrelevant declarations of how bored they were (nobody’s asking you to read this…). And that subjective, whining prattle is then dressed up in a fiction of being an objective review and added to a meaningless hit list that consists of other good writers being rated as the worst of the worst. I think that Stacnash is intending to be destructive and demotivating. Zero stars from me.

I'd say that there is one particularly dubious aspect of their reviewing process. They pick one arbitrary story from the author's story file and then judge not just the story but the author as well, based on that one story only. Most authors here have written many stories, with varying success. In some of them, they poured out their heart and soul, and some they wrote for quick fun and gratification.
I don't mind the harsh criticism, to be honest, although this particular reviewer gets really personal in their "critique." Either way, judge the story, not the author, or at least make an effort and review several stories to get a more objective overview of the author's abilities.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I think that Stacnash’s review of Annie’s ‘Wagered’ is a good example of the reasons why Stacnash irritates me. There may or may not be some valid criticisms in there, but it’s totally over the top in gratuitous negativity, including irrelevant declarations of how bored they were (nobody’s asking you to read this…). And that subjective, whining prattle is then dressed up in a fiction of being an objective review and added to a meaningless hit list that consists of other good writers being rated as the worst of the worst. I think that Stacnash is intending to be destructive and demotivating. Zero stars from me.

The whole point of writing is to create a reading experience that grips the reader and keeps them turning the page. If something bores a reader I need to know this. If anyone doesn't want to hear bad news like that, they will never improve as a writer because they prioritize an ego-fluff over improving their craft.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I'd say that there is one particularly dubious aspect of their reviewing process. They pick one arbitrary story from the author's story file and then judge not just the story but the author as well, based on that one story only.

Small price to pay. Give it to me straight, doc ...

 

[TheWritingGroup]

I think that Stacnash’s review of Annie’s ‘Wagered’ is a good example of the reasons why Stacnash irritates me. There may or may not be some valid criticisms in there, but it’s totally over the top in gratuitous negativity, including irrelevant declarations of how bored they were (nobody’s asking you to read this…). And that subjective, whining prattle is then dressed up in a fiction of being an objective review and added to a meaningless hit list that consists of other good writers being rated as the worst of the worst. I think that Stacnash is intending to be destructive and demotivating. Zero stars from me.

In my opinion, many of the criticisms were valuable. I am not all that sensitive. I don't try to read minds very much, so I won't comment on the Stacnash entity's motives.

-Annie

 

[YmaOHyd]

The whole point of writing is to create a reading experience that grips the reader and keeps them turning the page. If something bores a reader I need to know this. If anyone doesn't want to hear bad news like that, they will never improve as a writer because they prioritize an ego-fluff over improving their craft.

Being boring is about the worst thing that could happen. Yeah, that's something I'd want to know.

Personally I think I'd rather get a really negative review than a drive-by one-star.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

The whole point of writing is to create a reading experience that grips the reader and keeps them turning the page. If something bores a reader I need to know this. If anyone doesn't want to hear bad news like that, they will never improve as a writer because they prioritize an ego-fluff over improving their craft.

Totally agree. Every comment I et has value, not matter how pissed off the reader is. Worst case is I moved them enough that they took the time to cuss me out. Best case is i made them cry. Both comments help me become a better writer.

 

[bbcbarry9033]

Fair point. I hadn't thought of it that way.

Still not your fetish though. It's his.

 

[ThatNewGuy]

I don't mind the harsh criticism, to be honest, although this particular reviewer gets really personal in their "critique." Either way, judge the story, not the author

Yes. A reviewer should critique the work, not the person. Stacnash often ignores this, and at times seems to revel in personal insults and cruelty. Some examples:

• I would believe that you spent hours upon hours crafting this, which speaks to you already having reached whatever limited potential you have as a writer.
• I don’t think you’ve got the first clue what you’re doing.
• You wanted to appear more of an intellectual than you actually are.
• They [your editors and beta readers] wasted your time, just like you wasted mine.
• You’d be better off taking your ideas to Reddit and offering your fantasies as prompts to more capable writers.
• No one that cared about the audience would serve up anything like this.
• What’s even sillier is that you know this is drivel, but you only wrote it to fish ratings and followers from the Loving Wives genre.
• In time, you'll realise that the 100 followers you picked up won't come close to the damage you've done to your own reputation by publishing this.

Yes, these same reviews also included some harsh but constructive advice focused on the work itself. Yes, an author should glean what he or she can from that criticism to improve. None of that changes the fact that the words above are those of a bully. They are cruel, unnecessary, and add nothing of critical value.

 

[onehitwanda]

Great writing as always! Unfortunately I felt the need to remove one star from your customary five as I have an ironclad zero-tolerance policy in regards to marital infidelity...no matter how understandable or merited it is! It soured the experience somewhat.

I mean, fair enough, though it's a strange line in the sand.

And on the topic of Stacnash... well...

When your work is so simple and targets tabloid readers, you can't complain when a broadsheet audience concludes that your writing is completely bereft of sophistication and effort.

You just have to remember that you can't save all the puppies.

 

[Actingup]

I mean, fair enough, though it's a strange line in the sand.

Isn't it just? It confuses the subject matter of a story with the skill of the author in telling the story, and even in mainstream literature it would be rather limiting for a reader, let alone on Literotica! Does he/she rate the Bible as only a four star document because it's got infidelity in it as well as examples of all the other commandments being broken?

I've probably said enough on the subject of Stacnash...

 

[yowser]

Seriously, I would loooove such heavy detailed critique, positive or negative. Any writer should.

You may well have sound reasons for avoiding this route, but extensive tough-love reviews are available for the asking in the Story Feedback forum.

 

[AllenWoody]

I just got stacnash'd! One star (19/100) for my story Injected: Haylee. As others have shared, it was a moderately detailed critique, mostly focusing on how I'd broken Lit's guidelines by posting a non-consent story in the non-consent category. Fascinating and entertaining.

 

[ICantLeafYou]

Oh, look, my first troll! It only took 9 months to happen.