An ongoing rant. If this bores you, it bores me, too. Why do some of you really good writers disable comments? Alii Nui disabled them on Pandemonia City, and this is a great imitation of the classic film noir detective story. If the mods have "disable" as a default, there should be a warning to writers, so they can allow comments if they wish. I've already complimented Rassendyll on his brilliant Sherlock Holmes parody, and the author (I forgot his handle) of the great Aurora Manhattan story. Dammit, folks, let me tell you how much I appreciate your work. And even let me put in my proofreading quibbles--it's cheaper than therapy, and you can always ignore my quibbles--I won't mind.
Moi, Je Suis Pistoffe
- Thread starter estragon
- Start date
I admit I'm usually a bit surprised when an author has disabled comments. (It's easier to understand why voting is disabled.) However, I can sympathize with people who don't want to have to bother with the effusions of 'anonymous' - even though anonymous comments are usually constructive, or at least positive.
I suppose the most surprising thing is when an author disables even the private comment facility. (I can understand, though, when somebody only wants to receive comments with a name and an e-mail address attached. Presumably they want to get feedback they can reply to.)
That said, the practice of disabling comments, public or private, doesn't actively irritate me. If a writer wants to publish stories here but cut off all forms of communication from his/her readers, it just seems a shade eccentric to me. I'm glad the option exists, though, because it obviously suits some people.
- polynices
I suppose the most surprising thing is when an author disables even the private comment facility. (I can understand, though, when somebody only wants to receive comments with a name and an e-mail address attached. Presumably they want to get feedback they can reply to.)
That said, the practice of disabling comments, public or private, doesn't actively irritate me. If a writer wants to publish stories here but cut off all forms of communication from his/her readers, it just seems a shade eccentric to me. I'm glad the option exists, though, because it obviously suits some people.
- polynices
Poly, Of Course It's the Author's Choice
and they can do as they wish. I was just frustrated because I like positive feedback, both giving and receiving (and that includes constructive criticism and copyediting catches). I know I ought not to expect every author to agree with me, or even listen to me. It was just a rant.
and they can do as they wish. I was just frustrated because I like positive feedback, both giving and receiving (and that includes constructive criticism and copyediting catches). I know I ought not to expect every author to agree with me, or even listen to me. It was just a rant.
Yes, fair enough. I'm all in favour of the occasional rant - they're good for the soul. (And I've had at least one here myself.)
- polynices
sr71plt
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Posts
- 51,872
Having votes and/or comments turned off is either a sign of an author who, as TexRad notes, didn't get the features turned on to begin with or of one who is comfortable enough with his/her own writing not to need either praise, false or otherwise, or someone else of unknown credentials telling them how to write. Doesn't bother me. If they aren't writing to welcome a direct connection with the reader, that's legitimate.
Blackbird Guy, It's only me and not my mind that is confusing things, as somebody said. Of course any writer can refuse either praise or criticism. It's my desire to give praise and constructive (I hope) criticism. As my man Rudy said, "If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you/If all men count with you, but none too much". As I said, it was only a rant, and cheaper than therapy.
