Just wondering

[O2]

1. Do you as editors read the finished product you've edited for someone once posted?

2. If you read them and have comments do you comment as yourself or anonymous?

Thanks

 

[sr71plt]

No and no.

 

[LadyVer]

1. Do you as editors read the finished product you've edited for someone once posted?

2. If you read them and have comments do you comment as yourself or anonymous?

Thanks

Sometimes.

I rarely comment, but when I do, it's under my name. I always rate a story I edited as a 5 as a way to support the author.

 

[PennLady]

I used to. Sometimes I skim just to see what changes were put in. Oddly, I can't recall if I voted on them; but if I left any comments, I'd leave it under my username.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

No and no.

I agree. I edit to the best of my abilities and yet some edits are not accepted in some cases. So be it. Those are the choices of the authors.

 

[robertreams]

I always ask to see the final copy before submission. So far that's worked out fine. I haven't commented so far, but I hate anonymous and wish I could punch him in the nose.

 

[DeYaKen]

Not all bad.

I always ask to see the final copy before submission. So far that's worked out fine. I haven't commented so far, but I hate anonymous and wish I could punch him in the nose.

Anonymous is not always the bad guy. He has come to my defence in the past. The trouble is he is usually arguing with himself.

I've said this many times before but I think it's only common courtesy to offer your editor the chance to read the final draft before submission. The editor can then say whether or not he/she wants to be acknowledged.

 

[PennLady]

Anonymous is not always the bad guy. He has come to my defence in the past. The trouble is he is usually arguing with himself.

I've said this many times before but I think it's only common courtesy to offer your editor the chance to read the final draft before submission. The editor can then say whether or not he/she wants to be acknowledged.

I have certainly had positive comments from anonymous, and although it'd be nice to be able to thank that person, it's up to them how they leave the comment.

If the editor wants acknowledgment they can decide that at any time. It doesn't have to hinge on a final edit, and I don't think the writer owes the editor a second view. After all, it's the writer's story, not the editor's. When you're a volunteer, like we are, you take the chance of whether the writer uses some, all, or none of your suggested edits.

 

[DeYaKen]

I have certainly had positive comments from anonymous, and although it'd be nice to be able to thank that person, it's up to them how they leave the comment.

If the editor wants acknowledgment they can decide that at any time. It doesn't have to hinge on a final edit, and I don't think the writer owes the editor a second view. After all, it's the writer's story, not the editor's. When you're a volunteer, like we are, you take the chance of whether the writer uses some, all, or none of your suggested edits.

If I'm going to tell everyone who edited my work, and I usually do, I think it is only polite to let the editor see the work if I haven't accepted all the edits. I don't mind getting slagged off for something I've said or done, but hate being blamed for something that's not my fault. I assume my editor feels the same way so I like to give the chance to say they no longer wish to be associated with the story. Hasn't happened so far but who knows?

 

[sr71plt]

We've been through this before. You are assuming what editors want. Others of us are editors and noting what we want. It's not my story and it's the author who has it last and submits it no matter how many times I might have seen it. I don't want to be listed as editor--which has nothing to do with the effort I put into the edit--and I don't either dwell on it to see if the author carried through with my suggestions or go vote and comment on it. (I might someday do the latter if I just loved it to pieces, but I certainly wouldn't take the edge off of it being the author's story by listing myself as the editor.)

And stop telling me what I should do or should want as an editor. You aren't one. You seem to expect your editor to have as much invested in your story as you do. That's both naive and a little arrogant. There's no reason why they should. And if they don't there's no reason for you to think that they treat the editing of your story with any less attention or respect than it needs.

 

[rexbrookdale]

We've been through this before. You are assuming what editors want. Others of us are editors and noting what we want. It's not my story and it's the author who has it last and submits it no matter how many times I might have seen it. I don't want to be listed as editor--which has nothing to do with the effort I put into the edit--and I don't either dwell on it to see if the author carried through with my suggestions or go vote and comment on it. (I might someday do the latter if I just loved it to pieces, but I certainly wouldn't take the edge off of it being the author's story by listing myself as the editor.)

And stop telling me what I should do or should want as an editor. You aren't one. You seem to expect your editor to have as much invested in your story as you do. That's both naive and a little arrogant. There's no reason why they should. And if they don't there's no reason for you to think that they treat the editing of your story with any less attention or respect than it needs.

Just wanted to note my concern that this seems to be a bit of a rant by sr71plt; not an outlandish one, but one that certainly contains opinions on editing that are not universally shared.

OF COURSE you'd have seen previous posts where this discussion or something similar in theme has been broached; you've responded over 28,000 times! Quantitatively, this is impressive, but the question remains: is there quality within the quantity of responses?

An editor would have a vested professional interest, even as a VE, in the story he/she is editing. I am both a Literotica reader and a volunteer editor, probably in that order. I edit, in order to be able to read more Literotica authors' submissions without cringing. And I ask the authors for whom I edit stories to credit me as editor. The stories aren't mine, and the decision to retain the edits I've made is ultimately the author's; the point is that an editor is noted as being asked to help. It's important for readers and authors to see that credit, and be aware that the author made an effort to have the story edited. Some authors, who will remain nameless, exploit this and that's something for another discussion forum. Authorship is like any other art form, and has its share of charlatans. It would be good to try to rein in the charlatan-esque behavior of editors, though. We should probably try to be proud of our efforts but since we're not the authors, and edit with more attention to standardized rules, it seems natural that we should be accordingly more professional in communication on Lit forums. If we aren't, I imagine we might lose credibility as effective editors.

I think that if/when I begin to respond and/or have an attitude about Literotica stories/authors as sr71plt claims to do as an editor, I would want to consider taking a breather from editing Lit stories, or retiring from volunteering as a Lit editor altogether.

 

[sr71plt]

That's a bit of a rant itself.

I'll be interested to see what you think when a Lit. author hasn't taken your advice (because they are the ones who actually submit the story and could submit their laundry list, if they wished) but has identified you as the editor and you take crap from the readers and get passed over by others seeking an editor for reasons that had nothing to do with your edit.

And, sorry, it's not your story. If you think you should have as much vested interest in it as the author does, you simply aren't a trained editor. One of the first things that will be pounded into a trained editor is that it's someone else's baby, not yours. That doesn't mean you don't take care of the baby; it means you don't show up to claim to be one of the parents of the baby. Editing is neither a creative nor a "look at me" function.

And as far as the crack that maybe I'm not or shouldn't be an editor, my professional editorial credentials are validated with the moderators of this forum. Are yours? Or perphaps you are just pretending to have editorial expertise that you don't have and your claim about what is "universally" accepted in regard to the public credit editors should be given is a bunch of made-up baloney.

 

[DeYaKen]

An editor would have a vested professional interest, even as a VE, in the story he/she is editing. I am both a Literotica reader and a volunteer editor, probably in that order. I edit, in order to be able to read more Literotica authors' submissions without cringing. And I ask the authors for whom I edit stories to credit me as editor. The stories aren't mine, and the decision to retain the edits I've made is ultimately the author's; the point is that an editor is noted as being asked to help. It's important for readers and authors to see that credit, and be aware that the author made an effort to have the story edited. Some authors, who will remain nameless, exploit this and that's something for another discussion forum. Authorship is like any other art form, and has its share of charlatans. It would be good to try to rein in the charlatan-esque behavior of editors, though. We should probably try to be proud of our efforts but since we're not the authors, and edit with more attention to standardized rules, it seems natural that we should be accordingly more professional in communication on Lit forums. If we aren't, I imagine we might lose credibility as effective editors.

Thank you for making that point so much better than I (not difficult some may say).

 

[kbate]

If the writer is a friend, I read and look at the story. If they are just someone who sent me a story to review and correct - I rarely bother. Often I do not even know if it has been posted.

With friends, the process turns out to be much more of a collaboration, while most edits are just, "markup and returns". What the writer does with markup, is their choice, I usually don't see the final product and often what I suggest is ignored anyway.

 

[Athalia]

1. Do you as editors read the finished product you've edited for someone once posted?

I sometimes do, just to see how the writer handled a situation that came up in the editing process that could have logically gone in more than one way. But I trust in the author's decision ... it's his story, after all. My role is over once the story goes back to the writer.

2. If you read them and have comments do you comment as yourself or anonymous?

As for the fiction stuff, I can't remember. If I did, it would have been as me and not anonymously. I did comment on an essay he wrote (actually, I commented on another comment on the story) in which I was mentioned. And that was also as me, not "anon."

 

[PennLady]

First, above spam reported.

Second, when it comes to editing for Lit writers, I think we need to distinguish between an Editor and an editor. Most of us here are indeed "editors," we are not trained professionally for it, and we are going by rules we have learned and picked up. This means that a) we should be ready to admit some of those rules we learned may be wrong if we find out so from an authoritative source and b) we will not function as an "Editor."

I know in the professional world there is no such thing as a "beta reader," but many of us fill that function as well -- reading a story over for plot, continuity, character, etc. and giving opinions about them. Hopefully we can back it up with concrete examples in the story. Even though we aren't pros, I don't see why we can't act as professionally as possible when reviewing/editing.

But professional or not, the writer has the final say. Many writers have told me, and said in forums, that they do not want an editor precisely because they are afraid that the editor will claim, or want to claim, co-writing credit. Now, some say they don't want an editor because it's "all theirs" and any help means that someone is a co-writer, but I disagree because I think they're being a defensive and disingenuous, and that's another discussion.

So to go back to the previous point, those who are claiming a vested interest are doing almost exactly what some writers fear you would do.

If you want to look over a final draft, or be credited as an editor, that is something -- at this level -- you should hash out with the writer. You should also recall that again, the writer has final say over the story, so even if you don't like the final draft, well, too bad. You can tell them not to credit you, but you can't tell them not to publish it. In that sense, what does it matter if you see a draft before publication or not?

 

[_Lynn_]

First, above spam reported.

Spam removed.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

First, above spam reported.

Second, when it comes to editing for Lit writers, I think we need to distinguish between an Editor and an editor. Most of us here are indeed "editors," we are not trained professionally for it, and we are going by rules we have learned and picked up. This means that a) we should be ready to admit some of those rules we learned may be wrong if we find out so from an authoritative source and b) we will not function as an "Editor."

I know in the professional world there is no such thing as a "beta reader," but many of us fill that function as well -- reading a story over for plot, continuity, character, etc. and giving opinions about them. Hopefully we can back it up with concrete examples in the story. Even though we aren't pros, I don't see why we can't act as professionally as possible when reviewing/editing.

But professional or not, the writer has the final say. Many writers have told me, and said in forums, that they do not want an editor precisely because they are afraid that the editor will claim, or want to claim, co-writing credit. Now, some say they don't want an editor because it's "all theirs" and any help means that someone is a co-writer, but I disagree because I think they're being a defensive and disingenuous, and that's another discussion.

So to go back to the previous point, those who are claiming a vested interest are doing almost exactly what some writers fear you would do.

If you want to look over a final draft, or be credited as an editor, that is something -- at this level -- you should hash out with the writer. You should also recall that again, the writer has final say over the story, so even if you don't like the final draft, well, too bad. You can tell them not to credit you, but you can't tell them not to publish it. In that sense, what does it matter if you see a draft before publication or not?

When was the last time you read some of the edited stories that are posted to LIT? Your standards are low.

 

[sr71plt]

When was the last time you read some of the edited stories that are posted to LIT? Your standards are low.

Is there an English translation for this, JBJ. I don't have a clue what you thought you mean by PL's standards being low or how that relates to anything she posted.

That said, most of the stories I've read on Lit. that were credited to an editor, I would have cringed to have credited to me as an editor. But I can't assume that the remaining problems with the work included any fault by the editor, because the editor had no control over what was actually posted.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Is there an English translation for this, JBJ. I don't have a clue what you thought you mean by PL's standards being low or how that relates to anything she posted.

That said, most of the stories I've read on Lit. that were credited to an editor, I would have cringed to have credited to me as an editor. But I can't assume that the remaining problems with the work included any fault by the editor, because the editor had no control over what was actually posted.

Had I written it in Mandarin or Greek the problem would be the same, you wouldn't get it. In terms of smarts you strike me as a Flat Earther.

 

[DeYaKen]

Thank you for this

First, above spam reported.

Second, when it comes to editing for Lit writers, I think we need to distinguish between an Editor and an editor. Most of us here are indeed "editors," we are not trained professionally for it, and we are going by rules we have learned and picked up. This means that a) we should be ready to admit some of those rules we learned may be wrong if we find out so from an authoritative source and b) we will not function as an "Editor."

I know in the professional world there is no such thing as a "beta reader," but many of us fill that function as well -- reading a story over for plot, continuity, character, etc. and giving opinions about them. Hopefully we can back it up with concrete examples in the story. Even though we aren't pros, I don't see why we can't act as professionally as possible when reviewing/editing.

But professional or not, the writer has the final say. Many writers have told me, and said in forums, that they do not want an editor precisely because they are afraid that the editor will claim, or want to claim, co-writing credit. Now, some say they don't want an editor because it's "all theirs" and any help means that someone is a co-writer, but I disagree because I think they're being a defensive and disingenuous, and that's another discussion.

So to go back to the previous point, those who are claiming a vested interest are doing almost exactly what some writers fear you would do.

If you want to look over a final draft, or be credited as an editor, that is something -- at this level -- you should hash out with the writer. You should also recall that again, the writer has final say over the story, so even if you don't like the final draft, well, too bad. You can tell them not to credit you, but you can't tell them not to publish it. In that sense, what does it matter if you see a draft before publication or not?

Thank you for this. There is another thing that puts people off using an editor. The fear of being lectured and made to feel small by an arrogant pedant who constantly talks down to them. My experience is that such editors are rare indeed. I stared using an editor when estragon (remember him) advised me to try it. I struck gold first time with my beloved Juicy and she did all the things for me that you mention. she made suggestions about where more work was needed and corrected my punctuation etc. I got an editor and a new friend.

My only problem with editors is that I always choose ones that have really busy real lives.

Personally, I expect to acknowledge the work done by my editor and I would be disappointed if they asked me not to. It gives the impression they are not proud of their work. If I haven't accepted changes then I give the editor chance for a final look in case they don't want to be associated. As you say, it's the author's story but it's also the editor's reputation.

 

[sr71plt]

*sigh* It can only be the reputation of the editor if it fairly reflects the editor's work. The Literotica system doesn't do that--the author is in no way bound to take the editor's advice. You really aren't "getting it," and it's nice for you what you expect from an editor and what impression you take from a story running without the editor's name on it, but it isn't what the editorial profession expects, no matter how much you assert it is. You know nothing about the relationship between an author and an editor beyond your personal experience.

The impression you give me is that you want to shove responsibility for the presentation of your story off on someone else whose name you can give no matter whether you accepted their editing suggestions or not. So, we can trade impressions on this.

 

[PennLady]

Thank you for this. There is another thing that puts people off using an editor. The fear of being lectured and made to feel small by an arrogant pedant who constantly talks down to them.

I don't doubt some people worry about this, but it doesn't seem to be mentioned often. In my experience, many people simply don't want to learn or change, or as I said, they fear or feel that getting editing help means adding a "co-author."

Personally, I expect to acknowledge the work done by my editor and I would be disappointed if they asked me not to. It gives the impression they are not proud of their work. If I haven't accepted changes then I give the editor chance for a final look in case they don't want to be associated. As you say, it's the author's story but it's also the editor's reputation.

But it's not "their work," it's your work perhaps adapted based on their suggestions. And a reader will not know what has been edited or not anyway. It has little to do with being proud, or not, I think, of the final version. Some people don't want to be mentioned because they want more control over who they edit for and do not want their name out there. Whatever the editor's reason, you need to respect their wish not to be acknowledged if that's what they want. If they opt out, it shouldn't be taken personally.

And no, I don't think it is the editor's reputation. In sports, no one watches for the coach; in writing, no one reads for the editor/editing.

 

[DeYaKen]

I don't doubt some people worry about this, but it doesn't seem to be mentioned often. In my experience, many people simply don't want to learn or change, or as I said, they fear or feel that getting editing help means adding a "co-author."



But it's not "their work," it's your work perhaps adapted based on their suggestions. And a reader will not know what has been edited or not anyway. It has little to do with being proud, or not, I think, of the final version. Some people don't want to be mentioned because they want more control over who they edit for and do not want their name out there. Whatever the editor's reason, you need to respect their wish not to be acknowledged if that's what they want. If they opt out, it shouldn't be taken personally.

And no, I don't think it is the editor's reputation. In sports, no one watches for the coach; in writing, no one reads for the editor/editing.

If I left glaring grammatical mistakes then acknowledged the editor, the editors reputation could be tarnished as the reader doesn't know that I had ignored the editors advice. That's all I meant by it being the editor's reputation.

I have read books recently where even I have spotted the errors (using their instead of they're). I have left comments saying that it was poorly edited.

As you say each to their own. I would still be disappointed if my editor said "don't acknowledge me" Apart from what I said previously, the kudos, if there is any, in having made a contribution to a good story is the only thing I can offer to show the regard I have for my editor. If the editor chooses not to accept it, then it is disappointing. Still I know of at least one person who doesn't want people to know he edits.

 

[sr71plt]

I have read books recently where even I have spotted the errors (using their instead of they're). I have left comments saying that it was poorly edited.

That simply is not relevant to Literotica. (You continue to just not get it.) The publisher is the one who produces the book in its final form, so, yes, the publisher (and publisher's editor) has some responsibility for the errors in the final product (*although look at the note on this below).

This does not translate to Literotica, where the author is the one who files the story and can file it in any condition the author pleases. The editor has no control over the final product.

You are simply comparing apples to kumquats--and looking for scapegoats. What your position translates to in your stubbornness not to understand the process is that you want to have full control over what is filed and also someone to blame for any mistake any reader points to. You want to be able to say "Don't look at me; it's the editor's fault" even if you filed completely on your own opinion and not on editor advice. As an editor I'd have you on my "author from hell" list (and, in fact, do from this and some other statements and assertions and assumptions you have made on the forum--and about me).

*The caveat here is that you obviously don't know how blame for a mistake is added up in publishing (and sometimes charged accordingly to get fixed). The author continues to be responsible for any mistake he/she originally made that wasn't corrected down the line (like the they're/their you cite). The publisher and editor are only blamed for what they introduced as mistakes. If the mistake is caught in proof, charges for fixing it are doled out on that formula. Thus, the author continues to be responsible for all mistakes in the original that aren't eventually fixed.

You continue, in my view, to just want to shift the blame to someone other than the author for mistakes in the final copy--which, in the Literotica system--is under the full control of the author.

He who has it last is responsible for its final form.

I have, in the mainstream world, had my name taken out of the acknowledgments sections of books where my edits haven't been followed enough for me to stand behind them. In that world I get to see and review the manuscript after the author has seen it for the last time. That doesn't happen in Literotica, so I never want my name on it. That's just one reason I don't want my name on it, though. Others include that I was taught that the editor is supposed to be invisible to the work and, at least on Literotica, acknowledgment that sr71plt edited it would bring out the long knives of the trolls. In fairness to the author, I want the story to be judged without that dimension. Literotica is not particularly a nice place in terms of objectivity and fairness.