Advice about reviews Review Assassins

[eroticstoryspinner]

Working to get my geek pride entry done I took a minute break to look at the interwebs. Ran across these words from one of my personal writing heroes Larry Correia. It's long and geared towards paid writing, but it has some good insights. If nothing else, it's hilarious.

https://monsterhunternation.com/2021/05/12/writer-advice-how-to-deal-with-review-assassins/

 

[TadOverdon]

<Never mind>

 

[CyranoJ]

I tend to largely disregard people who use the "SJW" acronym without irony. Or basically any part of what I've come to think of as the "Alt-Right Pricktionary," from "cuck" (as an actual insult, not the description of a kink) all the way through "simp," "virtue-signaling" and "whiteknight."

(Ironically a lot of these terms contain a kernel of truth, like the best lies tend to do: it's just that most users tend to try weaponizing them to a completely insane and nonsensical degree.)

That said, the advice really isn't bad for anyone who's targeted by brigading or review manipulation*, no matter its ideological motivation. Gamergate escalated to actual terrorism, and those of its targets who publicized what was happening became more prominent, not less. Same with recent runs taken by so-called Twitter progressives at Lindsay Ellis or Natalie Wynn: their subscriber counts went up, not down, because they were effectively able to weaponize that energy against the bullies.

Which is not to say that brigading doesn't have a negative impact. It does. People (rarely of the sort that bitches about "SJWs") have been forced into literal hiding and cut off from their families by it, at sufficient levels of severity. It can hurt the productivity even of the most defiant creators (Lindsay Ellis was frank about how much of her work on her YouTube channel had become about threat-modeling). But it's definitely not restricted to just one part of the political spectrum and Larry Correia isn't wrong about the possibility of using it to advantage.

* Review manipulation and brigading aren't the same thing, of course. I don't believe, from what he says, that Correia has any real experience of being brigaded. But the latter does tend to start out as the former and the advice still largely applies.

 

[Bramblethorn]

"The key is not coming across as whiny or victimized. People hate that. It makes you look weak."

*goes on to describe hostile reviews as 'terrorism'*

hmmmmmm.

GRRM, not exactly known for being a SJW, took Correia to task a while back for playing the victim: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2015/04/13/a-reply-to-larry-correia/

 

[CyranoJ]

I forgot Correia was part of that Sad Puppy nonsense. I guess another example of why I can't take people who talk about "SJWs" seriously. (And yeah, describing hostile reviews as "terrorism" is beyond hyperbolic, even if they're bad-faith reviews.) GRRM's post is really thoughtful, thanks.

 

[lovecraft68]

Banality

 

[Blind_Justice]

The ONLY way to deal with one-bombers, trolls and naysayers: Grow a pair, pick yourself off the floor and try again. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. The first question every creative putting their work out for the world to see is: "Can I take tons of abuse and/or ridicule?" Only if the answer is a resounding "FUCK YES!" then they should proceed.

Otherwise there will be even more whiny primroses spamming others with insults or, in the worst case of thin-skin-edness, DMCA takedowns.

 

[TadOverdon]

Leaving my first gut reaction aside, I'd say that the author has two observations that are not dumb.

• The first is the self-evident fact that readers are not too dumb to recognize an irrelevant and mean-spirited review and that it irritates them. It's true with books and it's true with products on Amazon.
  
• The second is that people rally around something they like when it's attacked. Hell, they'll do this even when the criticism is valid.

Generalizing from those kind of observations doesn't mean you can come up with a useful strategy. He claims without basis (I suspect) that you'll pick up new readers to replace potential readers who are turned off by a review at a ratio of two or three to one. That's pulled out of his ass.

 

[CyranoJ]

He claims without basis (I suspect) that you'll pick up new readers to replace potential readers who are turned off by a review at a ratio of two or three to one. That's pulled out of his ass.

Yeah, fair point. I do expect you're right.

 

[TadOverdon]

Oh, what, this guy was one of the Rabid Puppies?

Blech.

Okay, they midwifed Chuck Tingle. Their only collective contribution to culture.

 

[eroticstoryspinner]

Umm, without going inside baseball about Sad Puppies and the train wreck that Worldcon has devolved into I will make a couple of observations about Larry Corriea.

He is an incredibly nice guy who is always willing to help new writers.

He has made enough writing to literally buy a mountain and build a nice home there.

Beyond that he has made f you money to the point of when several national publications tried to smear him during Sad Puppies in a coordinated event, he forced to to retract the slander.

As for GRRM, Larry's published a hell of a lot more bestsellers than Martin has since SP.

 

[CyranoJ]

Umm, without going inside baseball about Sad Puppies and the train wreck that Worldcon has devolved into I will make a couple of observations about Larry Corriea.

a) The Hugos still exist and remain prominent because they found a way to short-circuit the exact Sad/Rabid Puppy crap that Correia enabled (which, I would expect anyone to agree who didn't want NO AWARD to sweep the major categories for six years in a row);

b) It doesn't really matter how many books you've sold if you participate in stuff like that, and Correia can 100% [REDACTED];

c) Nevertheless, everything I've said so far in this thread is still true and I have to give Correia at least that many points (I have never 1-bombed a Correia book or story and I never will);

d) Correia will likely never be fit to spit-shine GRRM's boots no matter how much he gains on the latter's total book sales;

e) Not a great look for the originator of this thread to be as desperately concerned about Good Old Larry's credibility as they appear to be.

YMMV, of course.

 

[MelissaBaby]

"The key is not coming across as whiny or victimized. People hate that. It makes you look weak."

*goes on to describe hostile reviews as 'terrorism'*

hmmmmmm.

GRRM, not exactly known for being a SJW, took Correia to task a while back for playing the victim: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/2015/04/13/a-reply-to-larry-correia/

I had never heard of this guy before I read this article. I wish I hadn't now.

 

[8letters]

This reminds me of ads I get occasionally on Facebook for the Tuttle Twins series of books. "Socialists hate these books!" is the headline of the ad. Why should I buy some book that people hate? Isn't it far more important to tell me who loves the books? Or does no one love the books?

Trying to apply this thread to myself, I always leave up negative comments. Readers can see the last five comments, and they'll often rebut a negative comment that they feel is unwarranted.

 

[ChloeTzang]

Love Larry Correia, and his blog posts are just about always full of gems.

Yeah, never, ever let them bully you into making a decision. The reason this so often works is because writers (as a class of people) tend to be sensitive, often introverted, and anything which looks even a little bit like barbed criticism can be a real emotional killer. The trolls know this. They depend on it, in fact.

And yep, you see that here on Literotica with our beloved trolls. Exactly what they do, and if you show any weakness, they layer it on. I'm sorta with Larry on this one - bring it on.

Which reminds me, it must be time to do another Loving Wives story

 

[lovecraft68]

Love Larry Correia, and his blog posts are just about always full of gems.

Yeah, never, ever let them bully you into making a decision. The reason this so often works is because writers (as a class of people) tend to be sensitive, often introverted, and anything which looks even a little bit like barbed criticism can be a real emotional killer. The trolls know this. They depend on it, in fact.

And yep, you see that here on Literotica with our beloved trolls. Exactly what they do, and if you show any weakness, they layer it on. I'm sorta with Larry on this one - bring it on.

Which reminds me, it must be time to do another Loving Wives story

Wow, I'm so glad Larry knows every writer out there and how sensitive we are and how we react.

Then proceeds to sound sensitive and thin skinned as he uses his blog to whine and vent about bullies and "terrorists"

Most people would give anything to have a life so trouble free that a bad review prompts you to use the word terrorist.

I'd leave that comment on his blog, but he'd probably cry, then call DHS and report me as a domestic terrorist.

 

[ChloeTzang]

.... I'd leave that comment on his blog, but he'd probably cry, then call DHS and report me as a domestic terrorist.

Nah, he'd just give you shit right back, and enjoy the exchange. LOL. He's actually rather fun. I've had a couple of exchanges with him, and it was entertaining. And he is a really helpful guy, in real life. Walks the talk.

 

[lovecraft68]

Nah, he'd just give you shit right back, and enjoy the exchange. LOL. He's actually rather fun. I've had a couple of exchanges with him, and it was entertaining. And he is a really helpful guy, in real life. Walks the talk.

If you say so, the article is attempted tough talk with an air of whining.

Having said that, its funny you made the LW comment, I've found myself thinking about submitting a story I have that I know will send them frothing. Its been a long time since I reminded incel nation what trolling trolls looks like

I don't know if you've ever heard of her, but Jenna Moreci has some great writing advice vids, and she's funny as hell.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_fcv9kBpDN4WWrfcbCrgw