Against the rules to resubmit published story to different genre?

[trickamsterdam]

I was curious if it is against the rules to resubmit a published story (either the same version or a very slight reedit) to a different genre?

The reason being, upon reflection, it perhaps may fit better in this new genre.

The search engine doesn't work for me (it drops, when I try to type in the box). Was not in FAQ either. Thank you in advance for any serious responses. - trick

 

[HeyAll]

You would have to delete the original story, as you can't have the same story posted twice at the same time.

 

[TxRad]

Did you specify the category or did Laurel put it in a different one? If she moved it, you are probably out of luck. If not, send her a PM and ask for it to be moved and the reason why. Add a link to the story to speed things up.

If she moves it, you keep your score, votes, comments, favorites, and so forth. If you delete and resubmit, it starts fresh maybe. If Laurel, the only person who vets stories, thinks she remembers it for some reason, she might give you a problem.

 

[trickamsterdam]

Thanks, guys

Was surprised to hear only one person vets all this stuff. It's amazing this place can function as well as it does. I mean that is a lot of reading. No wonder she wants the volunteer editors to take a first look.

I kind of like the option were you delete, give it a re-edit, and if she doesn't accept it back, it just is what it is.

In any case, thanks, guys, for responding.

 

[Hypoxia]

Did you specify the category or did Laurel put it in a different one? If she moved it, you are probably out of luck. If not, send her a PM and ask for it to be moved and the reason why. Add a link to the story to speed things up.

If she moves it, you keep your score, votes, comments, favorites, and so forth. If you delete and resubmit, it starts fresh maybe. If Laurel, the only person who vets stories, thinks she remembers it for some reason, she might give you a problem.

I've moved categories but it takes time. 1) Go to Submission page. 2) Add EDITED to the story title. 3) Insert the preferred category. 4) Add a Note requesting the category change. A week or two may pass before Laurel gets to it. Be patient.

Yes, just one mad woman reads or somewhat skims every stray submission and decides its fate. A filthy job but it must be done, hey?

 

[KeithD]

I mean that is a lot of reading.

A false assumption, I think. At best it's scanning, not reading.

 

[trickamsterdam]

A false assumption, I think. At best it's scanning, not reading.

Even with just scanning, that's an awful.lo

A false assumption, I think. At best it's scanning, not reading.

Even with just scanning, that's an awful lot of it. Must be why it says your chances go up "substantially" with an editor.

Seeing the editor's name at the top tells her you were serious enough to look.for an editor, get one, and polite enough to acknowledge him/her.

Chances are the editor assures at least minimal grammar, maybe even coherence.

I used to know a guy who was in charge of hiring. They used to ask that"have you ever stolen anything"question. If you answered yes, you were gone. Everyone's stolen something. They know that. It's just, they had so many applicants, it was a way to thin the herd.

 

[KeithD]

Even with just scanning, that's an awful lot of it. Must be why it says your chances go up "substantially" with an editor.

An editor's name is rarely attached. (Most aren't editors anyway--just an extra set of eyes, which is, yes, useful. But most volunteering to "edit" here don't know any more about editing than the writers do.) With the system here, an "editor" shouldn't want her/his name attached. They aren't the last ones to handle the story before it's submitted, so they shouldn't want to be responsible for what was submitted.

Beyond that, I don't think Laurel is influenced by whether or not it claimed to be edited. I do think she gets an impression of what the writer can do and breezes what she considers the better writers and ones who still to the rules through faster than others.

 

[GroverLang]

Does it depend on the time of the day?

I think the standard of Laurel’s checking does vary.

I think if someone has been submitting stories for some time and on a regular basis or churns out story after story like a waterfall they are more likely to be passed through quickly. There is at least one writer who submits a story a week, sometimes more, because they work with a James Patterson policy. The majority of the stories are not up to much but they’ve built up a big following so every story is Hot. More fool the people who are supplying them with stories.

Laurel cannot possibly be on top of her game 24/7. It’s not humanly possible. This is undoubtedly correct because of the percentage of stories, good and crap, that get through although inundated with all kinds of mistakes.

I would never name an editor/proof reader in a thank you at the beginning of a story for exactly the reasons expressed by KeithD. But I would say thank you so they know I appreciate their help. I edited a story recently and the errors were plentiful. It was submitted, and published, with only one error corrected because he didn’t agree with my editing. I had wasted a lot of my valuable time helping him and am not prepared to do so again.

 

[trickamsterdam]

I think the standard of Laurel’s checking does vary.

I think if someone has been submitting stories for some time and on a regular basis or churns out story after story like a waterfall they are more likely to be passed through quickly. There is at least one writer who submits a story a week, sometimes more, because they work with a James Patterson policy. The majority of the stories are not up to much but they’ve built up a big following so every story is Hot. More fool the people who are supplying them with stories.

Laurel cannot possibly be on top of her game 24/7. It’s not humanly possible. This is undoubtedly correct because of the percentage of stories, good and crap, that get through although inundated with all kinds of mistakes.

I would never name an editor/proof reader in a thank you at the beginning of a story for exactly the reasons expressed by KeithD. But I would say thank you so they know I appreciate their help. I edited a story recently and the errors were plentiful. It was submitted, and published, with only one error corrected because he didn’t agree with my editing. I had wasted a lot of my valuable time helping him and am not prepared to do so again.

It's hard to understand why someone would do a James Patterson thing on a free site? Must be something going I don't get.

They suggested in author's tips that it's nice to thank the editor. Maybe you could just put in that you appreciate the person's efforts to help, even though you are ultimately responsible for any mistakes, as you control the final draft.

 

[KeithD]

I edited a story recently and the errors were plentiful. It was submitted, and published, with only one error corrected because he didn’t agree with my editing. I had wasted a lot of my valuable time helping him and am not prepared to do so again.

The worse aspect of this is that readers who also see what the editor identified as a mistake as a mistake, they will blame the editor for not catching it. And if the editor was named . . .

 

[KeithD]

They suggested in author's tips that it's nice to thank the editor. Maybe you could just put in that you appreciate the person's efforts to help, even though you are ultimately responsible for any mistakes, as you control the final draft.

I know they do, but there is a whole lot of guidance given by the Web site that is outdated or incomplete or not too wise.

I've edited here and specified that I did not want to be identified as the editor. Not only would my detractors go after that story as if it had been written by me, but the system here has the author submitting the story as the last one holding it. They could do anything with it for the readers to see and just not follow any edits. Thus, I don't want my name attached to it and if a writer identified me, I wouldn't edit for them again. I don't need the reader credit or the criticism for something I didn't do.

 

[GroverLang]

It's hard to understand why someone would do a James Patterson thing on a free site? Must be something going I don’t get..

Part of Patterson’s publicity is he he sells more books than any other author. That’s because 90 plus percent are books on which he had collaborated with other writers. They do the lions share of the work and he takes the lions share of the royalties. Ego and money.

The type of writer on Lit who feeds off others is doing it purely for the ego. Hey, look at Peanuts! 300 hundred stories in the last 4 years. Aren’t they fantastic! They want a plethora of red, to be favorited by a lot of people, but really it’s just the ego.

 

[GroverLang]

Maybe you could just put in that you appreciate the person's efforts to help, even though you are ultimately responsible for any mistakes, as you control the final draft.

By all means, as I said previously, thank your editor/proof reader but never name them. If there are any errors in the published story it may be seen as guilt by association.

 

[trickamsterdam]

By all means, as I said previously, thank your editor/proof reader but never name them. If there are any errors in the published story it may be seen as guilt by association.

Probably the best policy is to ask them if they'd like to be named (I think some probably would); but not to name, and merely thank anonymously, as the default policy.

Thanks for the advice; at first it seemed like all editors would want to be credited as a kind of payment, but it makes sense why some would not want that.

At a minimum, it makes a lot of sense to ask; and if for whatever reason they don't express a preference, then thank but don't name.

 

[Hypoxia]

As editor and the beneficiary of editors and beta readers, I see thanks in a note at a story's end. No permission asked -- just do it and be grateful. NOT being credited as an editor seems negligent. What, I did that for no thanks? Feh.

 

[KeithD]

As editor and the beneficiary of editors and beta readers, I see thanks in a note at a story's end. No permission asked -- just do it and be grateful. NOT being credited as an editor seems negligent. What, I did that for no thanks? Feh.

What you apparently have missed is that what is submitted can be, and sometimes is, entirely different from what the editor recommended. The editor doesn't have it last. The author does. What part of that didn't you get? I must say, as a professional editor, most of what I look at here that credited the editor makes me think "that credited "editor" was someone who had no business claiming to be an editor." What is possible, though, is that the editor did a credible job and that wasn't what the author submitted.

 

[GroverLang]

As editor and the beneficiary of editors and beta readers, I see thanks in a note at a story's end. No permission asked -- just do it and be grateful. NOT being credited as an editor seems negligent. What, I did that for no thanks? Feh.

I won’t reiterate KeithD’s comments but just add to them. When I edit I don’t need to be named or otherwise credited either at the beginning or end of the story. As long as I know the writer appreciates my efforts that’s enough for me.

As for the editor being credited but not responsible for the final work I agree entirely. I edited a story for someone who, apart from punctuation edits, disagreed with the majority of my suggestions and barely made any alterations. Thankfully, for whatever reason, I wasn’t credited. It’s not necessary for a writer to accept all the editor’s suggestions but the responses suggested they perhaps they didn’t want an editor. Only someone to confirm they were right.

 

[Hypoxia]

If someone offers great input to a story, I post thanks for the input and take all responsibility for what's posted. When I offer input to another's story, I may be credited but I don't really care. It's nice to see my name thanked in a footnote but I don't die if not.