"Sweetly Immature..."

[amicus]

I love to write stories. I really do.

I met a young woman on the Yahoo, Books and Literature 'chat room' a few weeks ago and we talked...and we cybered, not on purpose or intent, at least not on my part...it...just...kinda happened.

And, I got a story out of it...she became aghast when she learned I obeyed no God, but that is incidental, but she went away and for that I am sad.

So I did a story, as we all do, part fact, part fiction...well all fiction but some of the dialogue, which I drew from the archives of my trusty messenger.

I thought it was kind of a neat story, that was me on the Honda, purchased in London; it was me in Paris and it was me before the Rodin statue, but of course, 'she' was not there...as it was long ago...just a figment of my imagination.

And, so, when I got this feedback:

" Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:11:08 -0500
To: "amicus" <amicusveritasb@yahoo.com>
Subject: Literotica: Feedback for amicus
From: "Feedback" <feedback@literotica.com> Add to Address Book


This message contains feedback for: amicus
About the submission: Natasha
This feedback was sent by: Anonymous

Comments:

Far too sweetly immature for me, amicus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"...Far too sweetly immature for me...."

Well, I get hundreds of feedbacks, most nice, some not, but I usually understand. This one I do not.

Anonymous reached down and touched a story of mine and I wonder why and who?

http://english.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=177968

amicus...

 

[Honey123]

I read your story, voted and left a PC.

I think this was a very tender, sweet romantic tale! I enjoyed it thoroughly.

 

[shereads]

As Dr. Mabeuse noted in the thread called Overrated Authors, in better words, it's presumptuous to dismiss the talent of a writer just because his work isn't to our particular taste. Your anonymous critic respected the story enough to qualify the comment: "Too __ for me." There's a compliment in there someplace. And another one in "sweetly." Congratulations.

That said, I never comment on stories unless I can add something positive to what's already been said, and I never score them unless I can give an honest 5. If a story is well written but not to my taste, it doesn't deserve a reduced score. If it's badly written, I stop reading and go elsewhere. I casually scored some stories when I first starting reading at Lit, but at the Authors Hangout I found out how seriously the scores are taken and that even a 4 can be lowering, so I stopped.

As a copywriter, I'm subject to daily rewrites by clients who couldn't compose a coherent note to their housekeepers. So I can't imagine inviting public comments. You're all braver and crazier than I am.

I'm going to read your story now, Smoove A. I won't comment, except to thank you in advance for the free story.

...and we cybered, not on purpose or intent, at least not on my part...it...just...kinda happened.

That's your way of saying you didn't use a condom.

 

[Pure]

see the rewards, ami, of letting women out of the kitchen?

 

[amicus]

I can't help but smile, Pure, Kitchen, bedroom, bathoom, they can go anywhere they want as long as they take a Swiffer with them, may even allow outside, on a leash to mow my half acre. GeeHah!

Honey, thank you very much for taking the time and your kind comments and Shereads, since first we met and crossed swords, well over a year ago, I have always looked foreward to your participation in a thread and seek it out if I see your Sn attached.

I absolutely agree with you, both in style and comment as you refer to reading and judging stories. I have never left anything less than a five and even gush a little in a feedback comment if the story moves me in some way.

A pleasure to know you.

amicus the appreciative (PS, more thanks are in order as Holly has joined her sisters with a little red H. I detested seeing that one story sitting there without that egotistical scarlet H. Thanks to all!)

 

[Guest]

amicus/shereads/Laurel/Manu, ST, et al:

There is only one rational strategy - defeat is inevitable if you aim to win rather than avoid losing. Damage limitation is the object of the exercise. At every stage, you should work out each possible move that you can make, and then calculate the maximum possible loss that you could sustain if you made the move. You should then select the move which had the minimum maximum possible loss.

This is the minimax theorem.

John von Neumann's Game theory had an erroneous proof. Ergo, the 'real' world.

 

[Couture]

amicus/shereads/Laurel/Manu, ST, et al:

There is only one rational strategy - defeat is inevitable if you aim to win rather than avoid losing. Damage limitation is the object of the exercise. At every stage, you should work out each possible move that you can make, and then calculate the maximum possible loss that you could sustain if you made the move. You should then select the move which had the minimum maximum possible loss.

This is the minimax theorem.

John von Neumann's Game theory had an erroneous proof. Ergo, the 'real' world.

Good idea CV. Maybe we should set up a test group before releasing stories to the masses.

 

[gauchecritic]

And, I got a story out of it...she became aghast when she learned I obeyed no God, but that is incidental, but she went away and for that I am sad.

amicus...

If you mean by this what I think you mean (she was against you writing a story including anything she had written to you) then I too am aghast.

Tell me I've put the wrong interpretation on this before I go and bomb every single story you've got.

 

[Guest]

Re: Re: "Sweetly Immature..."

If you mean by this what I think you mean (she was against you writing a story including anything she had written to you) then I too am aghast.

Tell me I've put the wrong interpretation on this before I go and bomb every single story you've got.

Just guessing, but I think he meant that it was because he's not religious. Could be very wrong, though.

 

[shereads]

amicus/shereads/Laurel/Manu, ST, et al:

There is only one rational strategy - defeat is inevitable if you aim to win rather than avoid losing. Damage limitation is the object of the exercise. At every stage, you should work out each possible move that you can make, and then calculate the maximum possible loss that you could sustain if you made the move. You should then select the move which had the minimum maximum possible loss.

This is the minimax theorem.

John von Neumann's Game theory had an erroneous proof. Ergo, the 'real' world.

That's what I was trying to say about the condoms.

 

[EnglishMuffin]

bump