Do you ever wish it was simpler to make edits?

[Voboy]

Not really. This is why pros have editors, and why they often have more than one. You want the finished product to be the best it can be, not error prone, even if the errors are honest and reflect something you did.

Which, in turn, is why I'm not a pro.

I used to be, and my publisher did make mild tweaks here and there. I was fine with it because it's NOT just my name backing the story at that point: it's theirs too, and their money.

But that's not the case here. So "what pros do" is irrelevant.

 

[MrReos]

I think the ability to self edit posted stories should be an earned privilege. I understand the concern that authors might post an acceptable story, then go back and add content that violates self rules. But if someone has published here for a significant period of time and posted some threshold amount of material without any violations of site policy, they ought to be given the ability to correct typos, misspellings and make other edits. I would stipulate that author edited stories be disqualified from any contests. Anyone caught adding prohibited content could be sanctioned by suspension and/or removal of their submissions.

Yes that would be good. Ok I've only been published on here for just less than a month but I now have 25 stories up with many being HOT and almost all the recent ones well over 4 (annoyingly several over 4.4 and stalled)

I had some problems at the start and some VERY helpful people pointed me in the right direction.

I look back at my first series and wish I could pull all the parts and replace them just because they don't read as well as my later pieces

Then I looked back on my first half a dozen and there are some obvious howlers in them including a male party who's name suddenly changes in the last paragraph (When I copied the text into the box I missed half of the last paragraph and the moderator noticed the error and returned it. It was a very short paragraph and I just typed it in and resubmited it forgetting I had changed the name, to avoid re-using the name from a series I am also writing at the same time and people thinking it is the same person.)

So I have several edits all waiting a the moment:

Changing the name in the last paragraph.
I have another where I typed parents as parent's for some unknown reason.
Plus another with a similar issue

I did have one with a spelling mistake in the TITLE but the mod was good enough to fix that when I added a line to the moderator box as I submitted the second part!

I have a well known condition where my brain auto corrects text as I read it so I can read a page three times and it looks fine then pulish it and read it again THEN notice an error. It means I can read a sentance with jumbled up letters in the words - a lot of people are the same!

 

[ChuckWolf]

I think the ability to self edit posted stories should be an earned privilege. I understand the concern that authors might post an acceptable story, then go back and add content that violates self rules. But if someone has published here for a significant period of time and posted some threshold amount of material without any violations of site policy, they ought to be given the ability to correct typos, misspellings and make other edits. I would stipulate that author edited stories be disqualified from any contests. Anyone caught adding prohibited content could be sanctioned by suspension and/or removal of their submissions.

I made this very suggestion on another thread.

Anyone with 25+ stories AND 200,000 word count AND at least 5 years publishing on Lit, should be given moderator privileges over their own work, with any abuse of that privilege potentially having their account closed down and removed.

If it works out, maybe reduce the threshold, which'll definitely make things easier for the site holders.

 

[ChuckWolf]

It seems like there would have to be limits, otherwise you'd have people making edits in response to comments, or changing endings, etc, in search of a better score.

So?

 

[Voboy]

...which'll definitely make things easier for the site holders.

You'd think. But assuming Laurel and Manu want to give up that level of control flies in the face of every behavior we've ever seen from them.

As I and many others have pointed out, a "solution" that doesn't appeal to the site owners might as well not even be posted anywhere. Might as well propose a trip to Jupiter.

Any suggestion that anyone actually wants L&M to take seriously needs to take into account their needs, wants, and attitudes. Where there's a dichotomy between doing less work and giving up control, our owners have consistently chosen to do more work. Control seems to be that important to them. And, from their standpoint, a publication delay of a day or two or ten doesn't matter a whit.

 

[SinclairGroupLLP]

Which, in turn, is why I'm not a pro.

I used to be, and my publisher did make mild tweaks here and there. I was fine with it because it's NOT just my name backing the story at that point: it's theirs too, and their money.

But that's not the case here. So "what pros do" is irrelevant.

It's also not the case that we're writing under real names, so you could just as easily argue that it's irrelevant who is tinkering with the prose since you - the person behind the pen - has no reason to be as concerned with what goes out under the byline. It could be anybody, after all. We see, for example, plenty of joint efforts that only go out under one person's byline here on the site. I don't think that detracts from the work.

To each their own.

 

[ChuckWolf]

You'd think. But assuming Laurel and Manu want to give up that level of control flies in the face of every behavior we've ever seen from them.

As I and many others have pointed out, a "solution" that doesn't appeal to the site owners might as well not even be posted anywhere. Might as well propose a trip to Jupiter.

Any suggestion that anyone actually wants L&M to take seriously needs to take into account their needs, wants, and attitudes. Where there's a dichotomy between doing less work and giving up control, our owners have consistently chosen to do more work. Control seems to be that important to them. And, from their standpoint, a publication delay of a day or two or ten doesn't matter a whit.

Maybe; I never got any sense that the story pending problems were related to control issues, but more about the 2 site owners just being extremely busy checking out the works and then processing them.

And with this being an old site, maybe there are software limitations on handing out self-moderation status?

 

[Voboy]

Maybe; I never got any sense that the story pending problems were related to control issues, but more about the 2 site owners just being extremely busy checking out the works and then processing them.

That's what I'm talking about, though. The delays are caused by them doing too much, as far as anyone can tell. But we seem to mind a lot more than they do. They don't seem to worry about the delays their busy-ness is causing to our publications, and really, why should they? The site continues to churn out dozens and dozens of stories each day, regardless.

So, from their standpoint, it's not a problem. There's more and more work for them to do, but they don't seem to mind if the alternative is to simplify their systems (and thus lose some control).

I respect Laurel a great deal. From what I can tell, she's spent nearly every day since 1998 running Lit, in addition to the rest of her life (which at least used to involve a day job; maybe it still does). I would not have that kind of dedication.

And with this being an old site, maybe there are software limitations on handing out self-moderation status?

One of the things I've learned by posting here is that many AHers are very well-versed in their knowledge of software. I am, alas, not one of them.

I'd assume you're right, however.