rating editors

[sexylaila438]

I wanted to see what everyone thought about having some sort of rating system for the VEs? Similar to voting on stories, writers could leave comments about the experience of working with you as an editor, rate some things like response time, how effective you are as an editor, etc.

I guess this would be posed to LadyC, but if there was interest, is that something that we could do?



SL

 

[LadyCibelle]

I wanted to see what everyone thought about having some sort of rating system for the VEs? Similar to voting on stories, writers could leave comments about the experience of working with you as an editor, rate some things like response time, how effective you are as an editor, etc.

I guess this would be posed to LadyC, but if there was interest, is that something that we could do?



SL

You have a great idea, Laila; but it would be difficult to implement. It would need the participation of writers and not every writers (a very small percentage in fact) come to the EF. Furthermore, lets say for example that you did an amazing job but that the writer doesn't agree with your corrections, who's to say that he wouldn't rate you very low where in fact you should be rated highly.

Also, I know of a few editors who don't want to be acknowledged on the work they've done for XYZ reasons, so those poor editors wouldn't appreciate to be rated either.

The only way your idea could be implemented would be, IMO, if when the story gets submitted there was a rating system for the writer to use, or not, when he submits his story.

 

[Darkniciad]

You have a great idea, Laila; but it would be difficult to implement. It would need the participation of writers and not every writers (a very small percentage in fact) come to the EF. Furthermore, lets say for example that you did an amazing job but that the writer doesn't agree with your corrections, who's to say that he wouldn't rate you very low where in fact you should be rated highly.

Also, I know of a few editors who don't want to be acknowledged on the work they've done for XYZ reasons, so those poor editors wouldn't appreciate to be rated either.

The only way your idea could be implemented would be, IMO, if when the story gets submitted there was a rating system for the writer to use, or not, when he submits his story.

Something like that shouldn't create a huge database/bandwidth problem. The only time it would appear would be during submission of a story for entering the data, or viewing the editors list. Radio buttons like the votes could break down the experience into categories, with an overall rating as the main display...

If allowed. I can see how some editors might want the display of rating turned off, even if it was high ( the same reason some discourage revealing their name, even if in the highest praise )

A binary on/off bit and a comma delimited average of the cat ratings wouldn't take up much space, processing power, or bandwidth.

I'd imagine that Manu has things with much higher demand on his plate, however. The percentage of people using the site ( figuring in readers, writers, editors, et. all ) who would have any interest in this is likely miniscule. Good ol' prioritizin' when you're the only code monkey chained to the computer *laugh*

 

[AsylumSeeker]

I wanted to see what everyone thought about having some sort of rating system for the VEs? Similar to voting on stories, writers could leave comments about the experience of working with you as an editor, rate some things like response time, how effective you are as an editor, etc.

I guess this would be posed to LadyC, but if there was interest, is that something that we could do?



SL

Another idealist; love it! And of course LadyC is write (pun). Back to reality.

 

[Max ODrive]

I know that, for me, some kind of rating system would have been helpful at times. And still important now.

In my writing "career", I've had the opportunity to assess the skills of 4 different editors, and have had varying degrees of success.

My first editor sucked. He missed stuff, didn't pick up on things that needed improvement, and even left spelling errors..

Thats why I don't edit my own stuff anymore..

I had the great fortune to encounter an exceptional editor next, so she set the bar for how I feel an editor should interact with a writer. Not only would she mark errata and suggest improvements, but she knew when I wrote something that was crappy in a section and make me go redo it. She even threw out entire sections that sucked. The overall work improved dramaically because of her assistance (and persistence!)

My third editor was basically a non-start. Sent work, no response... interaction at first, then *poof*...nothing.. nada.. *shrug*.. as much as I'd liked to have worked with them, I can't operate in a vaccuum.. if I can't even get work sent back.. even if its just a chapter or two at a time, I can't make corrections, I can't look at suggestions..

My fourth editor has the same capabilities as my second. She's sharp, smart and can clean up a decent sized story in an amazingly short time. I'd like to keep her as an editor, but because of circumstances, will not be able to, except under extraordinary conditions. However, I will be able to access her skills in other areas, and as one of my "first readers", but time will preclude her being able to edit.

Therefore, I find myself in need of an editor that can ensure what I'm wanting to say gets said, and if its something "wrong" that we can change it out until its right. While that person does need to pay attention to the mechanics, most of my mechanical technique is OK..

If I had somewhere to do a "Consumer Report" on editors, not only would I not contact the ones whos description doesn't reflect what I'm pursuing, but I can also see if they'll have the level of compentency I need to keep my writing at peak quality.

I know there are difficulties involved in this kind of process.. finding a way to do a rating system while maintaining a level of anonymity, especially in such a personality driven environment, may not even be possible.

Keep in mind, most writers appreciate any help we're given. I can't think of but a small handful who are so brazenly arrogant that they think they don't need an editor, or that their own personal editing skills are adequate enough for their needs. While there are a few reasons to down-check an editor ("non-responsive" is a big one in my book), more often than not, editors should all have favorable responses.

Granted, the editor/writer experience IS a subjective one. And an editor's score could be skewed by a writer who has issues with the editor's objectives. But the writer is the one with their ass on the line. We're the ones that have to bear the brunt of the feedback from the masses on our stories, so any tool we can access that gives us the possibility of providing the reader with a better reading experience, we'll use.. I will at any rate.

I just know if I could rate my current editor, she'd get a 5 out of 5 stars with a grumble that she's not two people so I could use the other of her as an editor.. *grin*

 

[snooper]

You can always vote for "Editor of the Year" if you think someone is a good editor and (s)he has not specifically refused to be nominated.

The editor/writer relationship is very emotive, at least on the part of the writer, and is not well-suited to any process of rating. Personally, I don't regard editing as a competitive activity, which the introduction of ratings would imply.

But then I don't think writing is well-suited to voting either, and you only have to see the number of threads complaining about the existing system (on the AH) to realise that abusive voting is all too easy.

 

[snooper]

A further thought is that you could set up a competition for editors if you want to do so. Get a panel of authors together, set a single story (NOT written by any of the judges) for all competing editors to edit, and then have the panel mark them on various topics, eg, spelling, grammar, punctuation, characterisation suggestions, plot suggestions, customer care, use of WP facilities, etc.

I, for one, would be fascinated to see the differences between the responses delivered by the various authors, but I doubt that it would be possible to calibrate the measuring instruments (judges) meaningfully.

If you really want to do it, feel free to use one of my three "Snooper" stories on Lit.

 

[starrkers]

Quick thought: one writer's best editor is likely to be another's worst nightmare. The relationship is a personal one and depends as much on each other's personality for compatability as is it does on the relative competence of each party.

 

[Guest]

Quick thought: one writer's best editor is likely to be another's worst nightmare. The relationship is a personal one and depends as much on each other's personality for compatability as is it does on the relative competence of each party.

Agreed.

 

[sr71plt]

Quick thought: one writer's best editor is likely to be another's worst nightmare. The relationship is a personal one and depends as much on each other's personality for compatability as is it does on the relative competence of each party.

Agreed. Also, the only real way a writer would know her/his editor was a really good editor was if he/she were a good editor too.

 

[snooper]

... Also, the only real way a writer would know her/his editor was a really good editor was if he/she were a good editor too.

This is a fallacy. I can tell a good violinist from a bad violinist, but I can't play a note on the instrument myself.

 

[adetaildiva]

but why?

Agreed. Also, the only real way a writer would know her/his editor was a really good editor was if he/she were a good editor too.

I know I'm setting myself up for a beating but here goes.

I, too, agree with the ladies about the author/editor relationship. However, I'm not so sure about this statement. If the author is a "good editor, too", it seems to me (s)he wouldn't necessarily be needing an editor's services to begin with. But, I'd think that'd be taking multitasking to a new level for the author. Wouldn't it be acceptable for each party to be "really good" at different things & use those different skills to compliment the each other's abilities?

Okay. The beatings may now commence.

 

[Guest]

I know I'm setting myself up for a beating but here goes.

I, too, agree with the ladies about the author/editor relationship. However, I'm not so sure about this statement. If the author is a "good editor, too", it seems to me (s)he wouldn't necessarily be needing an editor's services to begin with. But, I'd think that'd be taking multitasking to a new level for the author. Wouldn't it be acceptable for each party to be "really good" at different things & use those different skills to compliment the each other's abilities?

Okay. The beatings may now commence.

Oooh, I have a new riding crop!



Actually, I think that's a very valid point. And many writers around here, perhaps even the majority, do not use editors at all.

Some writers don't need a great deal of assistance with grammar or structure or content. But having a fresh pair of eyes viewing your work can be invaluable, especially for catching those tiny little errors that always seem to sneak by.

 

[palisa]

But having a fresh pair of eyes viewing your work can be invaluable, especially for catching those tiny little errors that always seem to sneak by.

I think that's the biggest point. I would contend that no editor, no matter how good, can edit his or her own work effectively.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

It's My Game

I edit my own work. That's not to say I don't miss things, but I don't miss much. It can be done, and effectively.

 

[sr71plt]

I know I'm setting myself up for a beating but here goes.

I, too, agree with the ladies about the author/editor relationship. However, I'm not so sure about this statement. If the author is a "good editor, too", it seems to me (s)he wouldn't necessarily be needing an editor's services to begin with. But, I'd think that'd be taking multitasking to a new level for the author. Wouldn't it be acceptable for each party to be "really good" at different things & use those different skills to compliment the each other's abilities?

Okay. The beatings may now commence.

The issue actually made (or that I attempted to make) in my prior statement is that writers who don't know all that goes into a "good edit," which they wouldn't unless they had significant editorial expertise themselves, can't fully appreciate a good edit. It isn't just leaving the arrangement with a warm fuzzy feeling (although that would be nice) or having the editor agree with them on everything (which probably would make the edit a waste of time) or resulting in a story that earns an E, H, And W at Literotica (which depends on the readership, which is fickle)--it involves tricky work (much of it designed to seem like nothing was done to the original when, in fact, it was cleaned up "real good") that they would only have a surface appreciation of/reaction to unless they were trained themselves. Seven times out of ten, a writer without a whole lot of writing experience, will emphasize the relationship part of an editorial experience, when it's how the manuscript turned out that is the most important element of a "good edit."

On the issue of editing yourself, though, like palisa, I don't think you can comprehensively edit yourself. Close enough for an Internet Web site, but not really for print in the mainstream (so, if you don't plan to go beyond posting here, you probably can do "good enough" if you are a trained editor or even an experienced writer). You are too close to the work. You inevitably will know in your mind what you wrote, but that won't always be what you actually wrote--and only a fresh read by another person will reveal that. And we all have habitual mistakes we make. If you made it in the first place and it's habitual, chances aren't good that you won't catch it all yourself no matter how many times your review it. The worse the habit, the worse the problem left unfixed.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

The issue actually made (or that I attempted to make) in my prior statement is that writers who don't know all that goes into a "good edit," which they wouldn't unless they had significant editorial expertise themselves, can't fully appreciate a good edit. It isn't just leaving the arrangement with a warm fuzzy feeling (although that would be nice) or having the editor agree with them on everything (which probably would make the edit a waste of time) or resulting in a story that earns an E, H, And W at Literotica (which depends on the readership, which is fickle)--it involves tricky work (much of it designed to seem like nothing was done to the original when, in fact, it was cleaned up "real good") that they would only have a surface appreciation of/reaction to unless they were trained themselves. Seven times out of ten, a writer without a whole lot of writing experience, will emphasize the relationship part of an editorial experience, when it's how the manuscript turned out that is the most important element of a "good edit."

On the issue of editing yourself, though, like palisa, I don't think you can comprehensively edit yourself. Close enough for an Internet Web site, but not really for print in the mainstream (so, if you don't plan to go beyond posting here, you probably can do "good enough" if you are a trained editor or even an experienced writer). You are too close to the work. You inevitably will know in your mind what you wrote, but that won't always be what you actually wrote--and only a fresh read by another person will reveal that. And we all have habitual mistakes we make. If you made it in the first place and it's habitual, chances aren't good that you won't catch it all yourself no matter how many times your review it. The worse the habit, the worse the problem left unfixed.

I'll agree, and likewise voice my disdain that a person with such obvious talent has decided not to share it. I'm not special, I merely try to share my skills. SR, you write so well, why do you remain so elusive ??

 

[sr71plt]

I'll agree, and likewise voice my disdain that a person with such obvious talent has decided not to share it. I'm not special, I merely try to share my skills. SR, you write so well, why do you remain so elusive ??

Excuse me? Are you referring to me? Share it? Share what, AS? I work pretty much full time in what I thought would be a part-time semiretirement job in book editing. I'm editing now, as I check in here--having just switched from a book on global Islamic jihad to a literary criticism on William Faulkner (whose real name was Falkner, by the way, as I've just seen). I also edit stories going up on Lit. that aren't mine. Not many, though. I try to keep writing time of my own. Or are you refering to some other "person with obvious talent"? Possibly so, but you've quoted my posting. You post some of the wierdest things and make some of the strangest assertions, you know. Explain, please. I'm all ears.

 

[AsylumSeeker]

You Misunderstand...??

I was actually attempting to be complimentary, not combative.

I feel that in the same breath you criticize, you could be a positive influence on a struggling writer. Why are you so negative and resist us?

Never mind, I already know. It's a shame. I need to stop visiting these allowed halls.

 

[palisa]

I edit my own work. That's not to say I don't miss things, but I don't miss much. It can be done, and effectively.

Hmmm...how do we arrange a challenge?

The problem is that I'm on offense and you're on defense, so I don't have to "prove" that I can edit my own pieces, much less edit them effectively. I don't think I can.

 

[starrkers]

I edit my own work. That's not to say I don't miss things, but I don't miss much. It can be done, and effectively.

But never totally accurately.
I, too, mostly do my own editing. And always i am chagrinned at the errors I notice after the story has posted.

 

[sr71plt]

I was actually attempting to be complimentary, not combative.

I feel that in the same breath you criticize, you could be a positive influence on a struggling writer. Why are you so negative and resist us?

Never mind, I already know. It's a shame. I need to stop visiting these allowed halls.

You always start off with those false assumptions--which often, as here, are based on something already swept away. I do edit for struggling writers, including here at Lit.--and have stated as much on this forum. One fourth of my editing time is devoted to nopay editorial help; I have a free-use Web site up devoted entirely to questions on getting through the publishing process--which of course I won't identify here (and don't care squat whether or not you believe me). Why do you assume otherwise? "Never mind, I already know."

You also always presume I have something to prove to you. And I don't. I've given you evidence you weedled for on having been an SR71 pilot--and if you really are in the Air Force, you would have recognized the evidence, and I've demonstrated editorial expertise--and I have over two hundred stories here that demonstrate not only my writing ability but also how big my world of experience is. Which is the problem here. Your world--and that of some others here--is too small to fathom how big my world is. And that's fine with me. I enjoy giving straight responses on challenges of my background and knowing I've given straight answers and that your world is too small to fathom a world this big. And the kicker is that it means squat to me what you think I do/have done in the real world.

In turn, you've given me nothing to support that you've been anywhere near the USAF (and, surprise, I don't care really)--and certainly I've seen no demonstration of editorial expertise by you--certainly having to ask how to spell OK isn't a good start on showing expertise. A real editor knows how to figure that out without having to come to a chat room to hear what other supposed editors' friend of Aunt Matilda's guesses is the answer. So, there we be.

 

[Max ODrive]

Dude, I could give a rats ass if you were a pilot, or a stewardess.. The amout of bullshit you've introduced into this, as well as MANY OTHER threads makes me glad I own stock in the hip-wader industry. Between you and the folks in public office, I'm seriously considering buying stock in the snorkeling industry as well.

I don't know how hard it is for you to understand how simple this thread was supposed to be. There was a basic question asked, and all the original poster wanted was some guidance about how we could possibly improve things around here.

Maybe you were dropped on your head as a child.. maybe it was the amount of time you spent above the stratosphere without an oxygen mask. maybe its simply bad manners (which makes it a parenting issue), but somewhere along the line, you've managed to create the impression that you're a self-centered, narrow-minded, arrogant asshole who does nothing worthwhile except expound upon his own greatness, and belittle those around you that you feel aren't worthy of your presence. And you wonder why WE THE PEOPLE make assumptions about you and what you have to say.

GIVE IT A REST. There's only so much yeast you have to put into a loaf of bread before you ruin it. If we're truly beneath your "greatness" then right over there is the door.. don't let it hitcha inna ass onna de way out!

 

[sr71plt]

Dude, I could give a rats ass if you were a pilot, or a stewardess.. The amout of bullshit you've introduced into this thread makes me glad I own stock in the hip-wader industry. Between you and the folks in public office, I'm seriously considering buying stock in the snorkeling industry as well.

I don't know how hard it is for you to understand how simple this thread was supposed to be. There was a basic question asked, and all the original poster wanted was some guidance about how she needed to handle a very ticklish problem.

Maybe you were dropped on your head as a child.. maybe it was the amount of time you spent above the stratosphere without an oxygen mask. maybe its simply bad manners (which makes it a parenting issue), but somewhere along the line, you've managed to create the impression that you're a self-centered, narrow-minded, arrogant asshole who does nothing worthwhile except expound upon his own greatness, and belittle those around you that you feel aren't worthy of your presence. And you wonder why WE THE PEOPLE make assumptions about you and what you have to say.

GIVE IT A REST. There's only so much yeast you have to put into a loaf of bread before you ruin it. If we're truly beneath your "greatness" then right over there is the door.. don't let it hitcha inna ass onna de way out!

And I'm just crushed you think so--really. I hardly know how I'll draw my next breath. But somehow I'll manage. *sigh*

But if you could read, you'd have noticed I was asked direct questions on this thread and responded to them. If you want to rant with your gutter mouth and pea brain at someone for going off topic, talk to AS.

 

[Max ODrive]

Regardless of whether or not you're going to suffocate within the next 3 minutes, why is this thread even OFF TOPIC to begin with? Would it be because you have this tendancy to take even the slightest offense when anyone has something to say about your commentary?

Would it be for the simplistic reason that the thread "isn't about you" and in your grandiose design, you know they all HAVE to be about you and just how wonderful you are and how much you have to offer to "the gutter trash" in this God-forsaken place?

As for the use of the nouns and adjectives I've used about your persona, I gotta be honest.. it ain't that hard to call an asshole an asshole. And besides.. its not ~my~ brain on the edge of a razor blade they compared to a pea rolling down an eight lane highway..