Imposter Syndrome and Being "Pony Famous"

[Kelliezgirl]

I think most creative types have that swag I mentioned, you need it. Just depends how much you show.

Going with your comparison I have spent what at this point is decades playing in 8-ball and dart leagues. I find the pool crowd to be more laid back, less cocky, more out to enjoy the night out and appreciative of good play even when its against you. Lot of good sportsmanship and not a lot of drama in general.

The dart leagues and I've played in a few different ones, are full of bragging, ball busting, trash talking and in many cases damned near belligerent about it. Its a bit of a different crowd, the pool league seems to have more women and also more white collar types, the dart leagues are more your roughneck type and they also tend to drink a lot more.

I'm one of those play to the level of types. I have a good time in the pool league and don't tease or provoke anyone. In the dart leagues I'm a shit talking assholes. I met my wife at a play off night in one of my leagues so I guess I'm good at being a jack ass..

I'd be curious how consistent that is amongst other leagues. I've never played in a pool league but in college some friends and I would meet at a pool hall regularly to play. It was always a pretty laid back atmosphere.
Are darts inherently more aggressive/belligerent whatever term you want to use, or is there something about your particular league? Are most of the guys like you, generally not that way but they adopt the culture while they are there?
Are there other dart leagues where everyone is super chill?

I don't think this place is terribly ego driven, or writing in general. The challenge with any sort of criticism when it comes to any creative endeavor is that there really isn't a definitive right answer. If you and I play 8 ball then we're going to figure out really quickly who is better. There won't be any room for argument. It might be clear cut, we might be very close, but as they say, ball don't lie.
Now, how do we decide who is a better writer? No definitive way to tell. And, most importantly to me, who cares? Writing isn't competitive. You playing a lights out game of 8 ball means I lose. You writing a brilliant story means I win, because I get to read it.

 

[lovecraft68]

I threw some darts with people who were part of a league in NYC and another set of people down in Chicago when I had to go there for work. It was a little more casual as it wasn't anything official, just playing for drinks. But the general vibe is still more 'street' for lack of a better word. One thing that could be a factor is pool was originally played in small bars of smoke filled sketchy poolhalls, then at some point evolved into places like Bo's Billiards and other places which were large places, a lot friendlier toward women and peopel who didn't look like they'd just spent the last ten hours loading trucks, or the odd guys dressed better who would usually be there to hustle at the risk of his own health. In other words, the game left behind its shadiness and got cleaned up.

Darts though pretty much stayed in the bars so maybe that's it. I saw several fights in the dart leagues and this was in both bud lite leagues and smaller house leagues. I don't know. Maybe it is the booze and it being much more geared towards 'real men' . I love the game, but can't stand that type, but I do like to troll and they're fun to stir up.

As for writing, you're spot on, way to subjective. Let 10 people read one of your stories vs one of mine and get some liking you more, some leaning my way and some telling us we're both hacks and to please stop. I had someone suggest to me once it could be fun in the forum to do a "head to head" with authors here. Ask people who's better. I did manage to convince them how badly that would go over.

I've always seen myself in the sense of I'm not the best writer here, but I'm not the worst and that's where I leave it. I do think there's a small number here who are full of themselves and legends in their own mind, but I don't call that stuff out, I just smirk and think cute you think that.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I threw some darts with people who were part of a league in NYC and another set of people down in Chicago when I had to go there for work. It was a little more casual as it wasn't anything official, just playing for drinks. But the general vibe is still more 'street' for lack of a better word. One thing that could be a factor is pool was originally played in small bars of smoke filled sketchy poolhalls, then at some point evolved into places like Bo's Billiards and other places which were large places, a lot friendlier toward women and peopel who didn't look like they'd just spent the last ten hours loading trucks, or the odd guys dressed better who would usually be there to hustle at the risk of his own health. In other words, the game left behind its shadiness and got cleaned up.

Darts though pretty much stayed in the bars so maybe that's it. I saw several fights in the dart leagues and this was in both bud lite leagues and smaller house leagues. I don't know. Maybe it is the booze and it being much more geared towards 'real men' . I love the game, but can't stand that type, but I do like to troll and they're fun to stir up.

As for writing, you're spot on, way to subjective. Let 10 people read one of your stories vs one of mine and get some liking you more, some leaning my way and some telling us we're both hacks and to please stop. I had someone suggest to me once it could be fun in the forum to do a "head to head" with authors here. Ask people who's better. I did manage to convince them how badly that would go over.

I've always seen myself in the sense of I'm not the best writer here, but I'm not the worst and that's where I leave it. I do think there's a small number here who are full of themselves and legends in their own mind, but I don't call that stuff out, I just smirk and think cute you think that.

Interesting, I've been to places where there is a dartboard in the corner, but never been around any kind of organized darts.

You're right, any kind of head to head would be a hot mess.

 

[TheLobster]

As for writing, you're spot on, way to[o] subjective.

Nah, you can get a totally objective evaluation of one’s writing if you wish. Just ask the infallible oracle Stacnash

I had someone suggest to me once it could be fun in the forum to do a "head to head" with authors here. Ask people who's better. I did manage to convince them how badly that would go over.

It would just make circles. People would say they prefer A over B, B over C, but C over A. Good luck parsing who’s better from such data.

 

[lovecraft68]

Nah, you can get a totally objective evaluation of one’s writing if you wish. Just ask the infallible oracle Stacnash


It would just make circles. People would say they prefer A over B, B over C, but C and A. Good luck parsing who’s better from such data.

You could get a totally objective eval of grammar/technical, although there are so many grammar rules that are less solid in fiction than non fiction, so even then...

As for the story itself, I'm not sure I agree. Maybe there are some people who can totally detach themselves from any personal preferences, not be offended by anything, treat a Romance story in their mind the same as a gang bang etc. But I think those people are few and far between. Even when it comes time to big time book awards there is always some contention over who won and who didn't.

Myself, I don't see why its a big deal. This is a free site, we are not competing with each other, people can read as many stories and authors as they like. Even in the pay market, the average e-book is $2.99 to $4.99 so you're not breaking the bank to but the new release of the authors you follow.

I think those who would feel they need someone to tell them they're better are the ones who are insecure and feel they have to be validated.

I think I fall under the more common attitude of love me, hate me, but I enjoy writing and I'm going to keep doing it regardless of the level of 'success'

 

[Kelliezgirl]

You could get a totally objective eval of grammar/technical, although there are so many grammar rules that are less solid in fiction than non fiction, so even then...

As for the story itself, I'm not sure I agree. Maybe there are some people who can totally detach themselves from any personal preferences, not be offended by anything, treat a Romance story in their mind the same as a gang bang etc. But I think those people are few and far between. Even when it comes time to big time book awards there is always some contention over who won and who didn't.

Myself, I don't see why its a big deal. This is a free site, we are not competing with each other, people can read as many stories and authors as they like. Even in the pay market, the average e-book is $2.99 to $4.99 so you're not breaking the bank to but the new release of the authors you follow.

I think those who would feel they need someone to tell them they're better are the ones who are insecure and feel they have to be validated.

I think I fall under the more common attitude of love me, hate me, but I enjoy writing and I'm going to keep doing it regardless of the level of 'success'

That's where the whole "ego" argument falls apart. It's not the ego driven people who are desperate for validation and good scores. It's the insecure people.

It's not a zero sum game, someone else's success in no way diminishes me. Readers don't have a limited number of stories to read, favorite, or 5s to give.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I think most creative types have that swag I mentioned, you need it. Just depends how much you show.

I have that swagger for sure, but only when I'm writing and when I'm writing I'm completely alone. That swagger goes away once I hit publish.

Going with your comparison I have spent what at this point is decades playing in 8-ball and dart leagues. I find the pool crowd to be more laid back, less cocky, more out to enjoy the night out and appreciative of good play even when its against you. Lot of good sportsmanship and not a lot of drama in general.

The dart leagues and I've played in a few different ones, are full of bragging, ball busting, trash talking and in many cases damned near belligerent about it. Its a bit of a different crowd, the pool league seems to have more women and also more white collar types, the dart leagues are more your roughneck type and they also tend to drink a lot more.

I believe that, but also, my poker league is online, not in person, so one would think that the anonymous factor would bring out more of the asshole factor, but no, the place is actually pretty nice. The trolls are minimal both at the tables and on the forums, and the worst people are on the staff - you know, give someone some authority, they probably abuse it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I don't think this place is terribly ego driven, or writing in general. The challenge with any sort of criticism when it comes to any creative endeavor is that there really isn't a definitive right answer. If you and I play 8 ball then we're going to figure out really quickly who is better. There won't be any room for argument. It might be clear cut, we might be very close, but as they say, ball don't lie.

I'm not talking about just the criticism. I'm talking about the writing. How many times do we see a post like this:

"Well, for an example of character development, for instance in my story <hyperlink> my character starts like this and ends up like this ..."

The writer is basically saying, "go ahead, click on it, read it, you can't not love it, do it do it, do it now so you can agree how amazing I am!"

Then there are the folks who never question the integrity of a 5 score on their work but anything less than a 4 is obviously a troll. These folks are everywhere and they are just so full of themselves.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You could get a totally objective eval of grammar/technical, although there are so many grammar rules that are less solid in fiction than non fiction, so even then...

As for the story itself, I'm not sure I agree. Maybe there are some people who can totally detach themselves from any personal preferences, not be offended by anything, treat a Romance story in their mind the same as a gang bang etc. But I think those people are few and far between. Even when it comes time to big time book awards there is always some contention over who won and who didn't.

One can be totally objective. It's possible but I doubt that anyone on lit was 100% objective. Being objective takes more effort. Setting aside one;s bias is a skill that takes practice to do. I'm sure that I myself could be 99-100% objective if I were being paid to do it. Even as a hobby I can do it to a degree fairly easily. I've beta read a couple things and often my comment is something like, "This part I don't like, but I could see this working for many other readers ..." sort of thing.

I can also say that as a song writer it is very easy for me to be objective when critiquing music. First I am just more skilled at music than at prose. Second, listening to a song takes three to five minutes, whereas reading 15k words critically will take me over an hour.

An example of me being completely objective in critiquing music - at work often they play the classic rock station. One of the bands that we regularly hear is Supertramp. I've never been into Supertramp. Their stuff just doesn't grab me, and I think the singer's wimpy voice kinda turns me off. However, when I listen closely, they have great parts, great arrangements, and usually poignant lyrics, sometimes even laced with clever sarcasm. They have lush backing vocals and melodic leads. Plus they use a variety of instruments in clever ways. Every note is carefully and well crafted. I have mass respect for this. Objectively, Supertramp are terrific. Subjectively, I find them meh.

I could do the same with a story. It's just harder for me to do. Some of us here are editors in real life. I'm sure that they could put aside personal bias for an objective review fairly easily.

Having said all of that, there is still great value in a subjective or largely subjective review because every reader out there reads subjectively. We want to know how the story reads, especially how it reads to a biased reader. Also, no one ever complains that their positive review was biased. This means that while writers expect a reviewer to read their work objectively, they do not hold themselves to the same standard when reading the review. ; )

Furthermore, all of this backlash about subjective reviews is really just to dismiss Stacnash. Well, yes, she has subjective bias for sure, but her reviews usually have tons of objectivity in them as well. For instance, when she tells you that you glossed over your hot sex scene with three lines of exposition, that's not bias, that's fact. She has a lot of that in her reviews.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

That's where the whole "ego" argument falls apart. It's not the ego driven people who are desperate for validation and good scores. It's the insecure people.

These people are the same people.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I'm not talking about just the criticism. I'm talking about the writing. How many times do we see a post like this:

"Well, for an example of character development, for instance in my story <hyperlink> my character starts like this and ends up like this ..."

The writer is basically saying, "go ahead, click on it, read it, you can't not love it, do it do it, do it now so you can agree how amazing I am!"

Then there are the folks who never question the integrity of a 5 score on their work but anything less than a 4 is obviously a troll. These folks are everywhere and they are just so full of themselves.

But they aren't saying that. Someone asks a question, "how do you handle situation X".
Someone responds with, I handle it like this, here is an example.

That's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. State your case and provide an example. They aren't saying. "This is the way it must be done!!!!"
They are simply saying, "this is what I did."
I'm on a baking site and people ask for advice on techniques and recipes all the time. The response is "here's what I do" or "here's my recipe". I've never seen anyone claim that makes them some kind of egomaniac.
It's just sharing a technique and you can take it or leave it.

As for scores, I've never heard anyone claim a 4 was illegitimate or unjustified.
There is no question that there are 1 bombers and trolls out there, the only real question is to what extent they impact scores. Some see it as a huge problem, others as a much smaller one.
Some of that may be driven by how often the trolls go after them.

As for being objective, literature can't be objectively graded because there is no objective standard to grade it against.
Is Supertramp objectively better or worse than ELO? If there was an objective measure there would be no question, no room for debate.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But they aren't saying that. Someone asks a question, "how do you handle situation X".
Someone responds with, I handle it like this, here is an example.

When someone links their own work and then spends an entire paragraph explaining it, the link isn't saving them any work. They could just explain their process without the link. There are other people who will explain techniques without even mentioning their own titles or characters let alone a link, and they are just as effective.

As for scores, I've never heard anyone claim a 4 was illegitimate or unjustified.
There is no question that there are 1 bombers and trolls out there, the only real question is to what extent they impact scores. Some see it as a huge problem, others as a much smaller one.
Some of that may be driven by how often the trolls go after them.

First I said 'less than a four', but I get your point. Every few weeks here someone claims "I just got trolled by a 1-bomb!" as if no one could ever give their brilliant story a legitimate 1. These same people would never ever question the legitimacy of a 5 score. Obviously someone voting a 5 knows exactly what they are talking about. Neither the 1 nor the 5 has any known basis if not backed up by some sort of comment/reasoning, but the writer sees it as 5 obviously legit and 1 obviously troll. This is nothing but arrogance. Which is fine but it proves that for most of us it is NOT okay to be biased when judging but it is perfectly okay to be biased when judging the judging. It's an arrogant double standard and the writer is only fooling himself.

As for being objective, literature can't be objectively graded because there is no objective standard to grade it against.
Is Supertramp objectively better or worse than ELO? If there was an objective measure there would be no question, no room for debate.

By that argument then no criticism is ever worth anything so there is no point to feedback whatsoever. And we all love feedback so it must be worth something, right?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

When someone links their own work and then spends an entire paragraph explaining it, the link isn't saving them any work. They could just explain their process without the link. There are other people who will explain techniques without even mentioning their own titles or characters let alone a link, and they are just as effective.



First I said 'less than a four', but I get your point. Every few weeks here someone claims "I just got trolled by a 1-bomb!" as if no one could ever give their brilliant story a legitimate 1. These same people would never ever question the legitimacy of a 5 score. Obviously someone voting a 5 knows exactly what they are talking about. Neither the 1 nor the 5 has any known basis if not backed up by some sort of comment/reasoning, but the writer sees it as 5 obviously legit and 1 obviously troll. This is nothing but arrogance. Which is fine but it proves that for most of us it is NOT okay to be biased when judging but it is perfectly okay to be biased when judging the judging. It's an arrogant double standard and the writer is only fooling himself.



By that argument then no criticism is ever worth anything so there is no point to feedback whatsoever. And we all love feedback so it must be worth something, right?

Speaking as someone who doesn't link her own stories I would agree that it's certainly possible to explain a point without providing a link to an example, I just see no evidence that doing so is proof of massive ego. Some people do find it valuable though. On at least two occasions that I can recall here I've participated in one of those discussions, described what I do and later someone asked me for the name of the story so they could read it.
You mentioned in the thread today about character descriptions how you can provide a quite vivid one. You don't see the value in providing a concrete example? Perhaps your idea of vivid doesn't match the OPs?

As for the legitimacy of criticism, the fact that there is no objective measure doesn't mean people shouldn't consider feedback, but it also means we shouldn't be a slave to it.

If we had Cormac McCarthy (yeah I know he's dead), Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Toni Morrison and JK Rowling to all write a short story based off the prompt, "A 12 year old boy comes home from school and finds his father dead in the living room." We'd get 5 very different stories. There would be no objective way to say, "this one is the best".

Good feedback should make you consider what you've written, and provide an explanation of why the critic thinks something didn't work. That doesn't mean it's absolute. Professional literary critics, music critics, movie critics, all disagree. That doesn't mean they don't have value.

 

[StillStunned]

As for the legitimacy of criticism, the fact that there is no objective measure doesn't mean people shouldn't consider feedback, but it also means we shouldn't be a slave to it.

If we had Cormac McCarthy (yeah I know he's dead), Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Toni Morrison and JK Rowling to all write a short story based off the prompt, "A 12 year old boy comes home from school and finds his father dead in the living room." We'd get 5 very different stories. There would be no objective way to say, "this one is the best".

Good feedback should make you consider what you've written, and provide an explanation of why the critic thinks something didn't work. That doesn't mean it's absolute. Professional literary critics, music critics, movie critics, all disagree. That doesn't mean they don't have value.

Constructive criticism should be like pointing out a path and asking whether the writer considered taking it. Maybe the writer didn't notice the path, because they were too focused on where they were putting their feet. Maybe the writer did notice it, and even consider it, but decided that they preferred another path. And maybe, at the end of the hike, they can look back and say, "You know what, perhaps the other path might have been better."

We all become better writers if we keep our eyes and our minds open. Criticism can help point out our blind spots.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Constructive criticism should be like pointing out a path and asking whether the writer considered taking it. Maybe the writer didn't notice the path, because they were too focused on where they were putting their feet. Maybe the writer did notice it, and even consider it, but decided that they preferred another path. And maybe, at the end of the hike, they can look back and say, "You know what, perhaps the other path might have been better."

We all become better writers if we keep our eyes and our minds open. Criticism can help point out our blind spots.

I agree.
I've got a friend who works in the video world, she had a professor who uses the "fat baby" analogy when it comes to editing.
Everyone loves their baby, nobody wants to hear that their baby is fat.
But sometimes you have a fat baby and need to do something about it.

Good criticism identifies those kinds of things and helps you address it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You mentioned in the thread today about character descriptions how you can provide a quite vivid one. You don't see the value in providing a concrete example? Perhaps your idea of vivid doesn't match the OPs?

On very rare occasions I have provided examples of my own work. When I do I copy the text from my file (a couple of lines, a paragraph, maybe some dialogue) and paste it in a quote box, no link, not even a title, usually no context. This is just as effective as any hyperlink (as any hyperlink will still require you to quote the exact passage anyways) and is arguably slightly less effort (or at most equal effort), and does not advertise. The only reason for the actual link is to get hits on the story.

As for the legitimacy of criticism, the fact that there is no objective measure doesn't mean people shouldn't consider feedback, but it also means we shouldn't be a slave to it.

But the only people who are 'slaves to it' are the ones who get bent out of shape over negative reviews. This is because they measure themselves by what others think of them.

As for being objective, literature can't be objectively graded because there is no objective standard to grade it against.

I might agree, but one person's objectivity is a fact unto itself. If someone says that the prose read poorly, it is true for that reader it read poorly, and probably there are a few who similarly agree that it read poorly. How many, we don't know unless we get a few dozen comments and some of them also agree that it read poorly. But that one reader's experience is a fact.

There is also the phenomenon of, "well it's popular, so therefore it must be good." News flash. Katy Perry is not good (sorry Katy, it's just the truth). From a subjective point of view, her body of work can be torn apart. This same argument is used constantly by writers here. "Someone gave me a bad review, but the story has a score of 4.73 so wtf do they know? Hrmpff!" So, we go read the first half page ourselves and ... it starts with an info dump and then continues with two cardboard characters engaging in some very awkward unnatural dialogue ... umm yea, it's not very good. But it scores 4.73 because it's in Incest and somewhere before the end of page 2 Mom climbs into Son's lap. Romance is actually probably the worst offending category for this (bad template writing scoring highly, not the incest : P ).

 

[AlexIce]

I hear you 100%. I've published close to 20 stories on here since I joined last year, yet I still struggle to call myself a writer at times. Even though all of my stories are "hot," I do have a lot of moments of self-doubt.

For every story that I have published on here, there are 2-3 stories that I've tossed to the side because they don't meet my expectations. If there's one thing I've learned since I started writing, it's that you just need to roll with the punches.

My first story ended up being top-rated and I felt like I hadn't deserved it. At best, I was hoping for something in the high 3s. However, the more I wrote, the more people liked my stories.

Mind you, I still have plenty of anxiety when I submit a story, but the payoff is worth it when I see how much people enjoy my works.

 

[Voboy]

On very rare occasions I have provided examples of my own work. When I do I copy the text from my file (a couple of lines, a paragraph, maybe some dialogue) and paste it in a quote box, no link, not even a title, usually no context. This is just as effective as any hyperlink (as any hyperlink will still require you to quote the exact passage anyways) and is arguably slightly less effort (or at most equal effort), and does not advertise. The only reason for the actual link is to get hits on the story.

Meh. Almost all of us are advised to link our story catalogs in our sigs, and many of us have done so... yourself included.

I don't see a difference.

I can only speak for myself, but when I link stories here as examples of what I'm talking about, I'm doing it for the same reason I put the link in my sig: for the convenience of my fellow writers here. I can guarantee you that after over a hundred stories I've vomited onto my catalog on Lit, my ego does not need extra views from the dozen or so people likely to spot a link here.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Meh. Almost all of us are advised to link our story catalogs in our sigs, and many of us have done so... yourself included.

I don't see a difference.

I can only speak for myself, but when I link stories here as examples of what I'm talking about, I'm doing it for the same reason I put the link in my sig: for the convenience of my fellow writers here. I can guarantee you that after over a hundred stories I've vomited onto my catalog on Lit, my ego does not need extra views from the dozen or so people likely to spot a link here.

Big difference.

First off, as to my own sig, the link is to my forum roleplays. This used to help me find roleplay partners, but since I don't really roleplay anymore I could/should change it. I could change it to my story profile, sure though, no problem, and someday I just might. Of course in my case, a link in my sig will just make it that much easier for my haters to bomb my stories like they do (and I know who most of you are, so eat shit, bitches!). Which again means that I should put it in. Hey, anything for some traffic, right? : P

But here's what makes the big difference. If your link is in your sig, you don't need it in your post. That's redundant. What linking convenience do they need to a small snippet that you have already pasted into the post? If they click the link, even if you linked the exact page in your story they still have to scroll to the spot ... just to read something that they've already read in the post. So the only real purpose is to advertise your story, which in itself is fine, but what you're really doing here is using the post in the thread as an excuse to advertise. It's kinda silly, especially when you already advertise in your sig. It's also self-serving in a thread where supposedly you're trying to help (offer advice). Link in the sig is fine though, because that is the most appropriate place to advertise, and is where everyone expects you to advertise.

And there's nothing wrong with disguising your ads in posts. It just reveals your ego. You think that we don't see it, but we do (some of us, anyways). It's pretentious af.

 

[Voboy]

Big difference.

First off, as to my own sig, the link is to my forum roleplays. This used to help me find roleplay partners, but since I don't really roleplay anymore I could/should change it. I could change it to my story profile, sure though, no problem, and someday I just might. Of course in my case, a link in my sig will just make it that much easier for my haters to bomb my stories like they do (and I know who most of you are, so eat shit, bitches!). Which again means that I should put it in. Hey, anything for some traffic, right? : P

But here's what makes the big difference. If your link is in your sig, you don't need it in your post. That's redundant. What linking convenience do they need to a small snippet that you have already pasted into the post? If they click the link, even if you linked the exact page in your story they still have to scroll to the spot ... just to read something that they've already read in the post. So the only real purpose is to advertise your story, which in itself is fine, but what you're really doing here is using the post in the thread as an excuse to advertise. It's kinda silly, especially when you already advertise in your sig. It's also self-serving in a thread where supposedly you're trying to help (offer advice). Link in the sig is fine though, because that is the most appropriate place to advertise, and is where everyone expects you to advertise.

And there's nothing wrong with disguising your ads in posts. It just reveals your ego. You think that we don't see it, but we do (some of us, anyways). It's pretentious af.

Yeah...

Again, due respect, but if you don't believe me when I say I'm not interested in "advertising" here in the AH, I don't know what to tell you. This might be yet another example of you reading minds and "knowing" things that simply aren't true.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Yeah...

Again, due respect, but if you don't believe me when I say I'm not interested in "advertising" here in the AH, I don't know what to tell you. This might be yet another example of you reading minds and "knowing" things that simply aren't true.

You're not interested, yet your link is in your sig and you admit to hotlinking your own stories in writing advice threads?? Hah! I'm not assuming anything. You're admitting it.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Link in the sig is fine though, because that is the most appropriate place to advertise, and is where everyone expects you to advertise.

And there's nothing wrong with disguising your ads in posts. It just reveals your ego. You think that we don't see it, but we do (some of us, anyways). It's pretentious af.

I'm stuffed then, because I have no idea what's in my Sig Block, nor anyone else's, because I turned them all off at least five years ago. I got sick of the flashing lights and all those book covers crapping all over my feed.

I don't see why it's such a big deal. Who gives a rats how people self promote, and why is having an ego so dreadful? None of us here are wallflowers, just sayin'.

 

[alohadave]

I'm stuffed then, because I have no idea what's in my Sig Block, nor anyone else's

One thing to note is that on mobile, sig blocks are not shown unless your phone is turned to the side, to save vertical space.

So, many people may never actually see the sig blocks.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I can only speak for myself, but when I link stories here as examples of what I'm talking about, I'm doing it for the same reason I put the link in my sig: for the convenience of my fellow writers here. I can guarantee you that after over a hundred stories I've vomited onto my catalog on Lit, my ego does not need extra views from the dozen or so people likely to spot a link here.

Agreed. Even when they're long out of the new lists, my stories get about 5-10 views per day. Across 34 works, call it 200 views/day total.

If I were to plug one of them here in AH, perhaps fifty people would see that post, and of those...maybe a couple would click through, if that?

It doesn't seem like a very effective way to bump up the views, if that were the aim. But some folk can't help but assume the worst of other people's motivations.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I just think that this advice to not be humble, to be the star that they see you to be, is a bunch of bull. Just be yourself, whether that's a swaggering big shot or just some average Joe/Jane who happens to write. The most disrespectful thing that we can do to our fans is to present to them a lie of our self.

The first thing that I say whenever someone compliments my work is 'thank you' or 'thank you so much.' Then I take it from there.