The Number of Editors on a Story

[BreakTheBar]

Hey all,

Not so much looking for an editor as looking to ask a question of both authors and our smarter counterparts. On Lit I have seen a drastic swing of how many editors an author might reference in thanks at the beginning or end of their work.

Unfortunately (for the story and the reader), this is frequently 0 editors. But then this can swing all the way up to four or five editors. I personally found one editor and have established a relationship with them and am exceedingly happy with how we work together (aka. I produce, he hits me over the head with obvious things and then I rewrite portions).

So fellow authors, how many editors do you use? And editors, do you feel maybe a little slighted when the author you are working with is 'sleeping around' a bit? Or would you?

If anyone does get up into that 4-5 person territory, are they really all editing or are some of them more alpha/beta readers?


~Break.

 

[sr71plt]

What makes you think that there was no editor when none is acknowledged? A real editor wouldn't permit acknowledgment on a story here because they aren't the last one to handle it before it's submitted. Anything could be submitted no matter what they marked in their edit.

 

[BreakTheBar]

I was more referencing the fact that there are many stories posted that obviously haven't been through an editing process than that the editor was acknowledged or not.

If I were a professional editor I also wouldn't want my real name attached to a Lit story; my anonymous username on the other hand would be a different matter. The point of the thread is about the NUMBER of volunteer editors used before a submission however, not the creative morality behind how and when an author does or should acknowledge them.

 

[_Lynn_]

I was more referencing the fact that there are many stories posted that obviously haven't been through an editing process than that the editor was acknowledged or not.

If I were a professional editor I also wouldn't want my real name attached to a Lit story; my anonymous username on the other hand would be a different matter. The point of the thread is about the NUMBER of volunteer editors used before a submission however, not the creative morality behind how and when an author does or should acknowledge them.

You can't tell by looking at a story whether it went through an edit, though. You don't know what the original copy was like or if the author purposely chose to ignore the suggestions given to them or if the person claiming to be an editor even knew enough to improve the story.

 

[sr71plt]

You can't tell by looking at a story whether it went through an edit, though. You don't know what the original copy was like or if the author purposely chose to ignore the suggestions given to them or if the person claiming to be an editor even knew enough to improve the story.

Yep, the primary point is an editor doesn't submit the story, the author does. The reader can't know anything definitive about the edit, because the editor has zero control over what is actually submitted.

That said, there is no validation of Volunteer Editors here. They can (and many do) self-declare as editors without knowing any more about editing than the author they have agreed to edit for, and, since editing is a high-training function required an advanced program beyond an undergraduate degree or long-term preparation in a mainstream publisher, merely self-declaring isn't going to get the author much help. But THAT said, a second pair of eyes, even if not trained, is a whole lot better than nothing, and, for most purposes on a free-read "for fun and arousal" story site pretty close to good enough.

(Just attaching this to Lynn's post; I'm pretty sure she agrees with much of this.)

On the number of editors used for a story, the more eyes the better for some basic mistakes. The kicker is that if the editors aren't all well-trained, the resulting committee work is more likely to result in pabulum than a well-written and -presented story.

 

[lovecraft68]

The story I am submitting this week I simply thanked another author for being a "second pair of eyes" because first, that's pretty much what they were, they checked for typos things like their/there and some basic grammar, it wasn't a full edit and this way I am not saying they edited so they don't have to be the recipient of a snarky reader comment like "they called that editing"

 

[_Lynn_]

Yep, the primary point is an editor doesn't submit the story, the author does. The reader can't know anything definitive about the edit, because the editor has zero control over what is actually submitted.

That said, there is no validation of Volunteer Editors here. They can (and many do) self-declare as editors without knowing any more about editing than the author they have agreed to edit for, and, since editing is a high-training function required an advanced program beyond an undergraduate degree or long-term preparation in a mainstream publisher, merely self-declaring isn't going to get the author much help. But THAT said, a second pair of eyes, even if not trained, is a whole lot better than nothing, and, for most purposes on a free-read "for fun and arousal" story site pretty close to good enough. I agree.

(Just attaching this to Lynn's post; I'm pretty sure she agrees with much of this.)

On the number of editors used for a story, the more eyes the better for some basic mistakes. The kicker is that if the editors aren't all well-trained, the resulting committee work is more likely to result in pabulum than a well-written and -presented story.

I've seen some of the "edits" from people who believe they know what they're doing.

 

[_Lynn_]

The story I am submitting this week I simply thanked another author for being a "second pair of eyes" because first, that's pretty much what they were, they checked for typos things like their/there and some basic grammar, it wasn't a full edit and this way I am not saying they edited so they don't have to be the recipient of a snarky reader comment like "they called that editing"

Good idea.

 

[LadyVer]

Interesting question by the OP. It's been my experience that one too many copy editors doesn't work, especially when the author runs back and forth from one editor to the other. I can see where an author could have several beta readers, maybe someone who's experienced with developmental editing, and then leave the copy editing at the end to one VE who is experienced with copy editing Lit stories.

I personally don't know of any volunteer Lit editors who claim to be professional editors when they're not. Anyone could claim to be a professional editor, but it would be hard to tell on Lit, unless they're willing to provide a professional website, blog, or Linked-In profile. I don't imagine that many volunteer editors who are professional editors want to provide that info to someone they don't know from an erotica site.

I usually don't mind if an author gives me credit as a VE. It depends on the category. I've found mistakes that I corrected in Track Changes that still got through for various reasons. Either the author thought he/she accepted the edit, the author purposefully didn't accept the edit, the author hates Track Changes or doesn't understand it, or errors pop up in the submission process because the author isn't being careful. Once a story I edit goes live, I vote a 5 for it to support the author.

 

[_Lynn_]

Interesting question by the OP. It's been my experience that one too many copy editors doesn't work, especially when the author runs back and forth from one editor to the other. I can see where an author could have several beta readers, maybe someone who's experienced with developmental editing, and then leave the copy editing at the end to one VE who is experienced with copy editing Lit stories.

I personally don't know of any volunteer Lit editors who claim to be professional editors when they're not. Anyone could claim to be a professional editor, but it would be hard to tell on Lit, unless they're willing to provide a professional website, blog, or Linked-In profile. I don't imagine that many volunteer editors who are professional editors want to provide that info to someone they don't know from an erotica site.

I usually don't mind if an author gives me credit as a VE. It depends on the category. I've found mistakes that I corrected in Track Changes that still got through for various reasons. Either the author thought he/she accepted the edit, the author purposefully didn't accept the edit, the author hates Track Changes or doesn't understand it, or errors pop up in the submission process because the author isn't being careful. Once a story I edit goes live, I vote a 5 for it to support the author.

I stumbled across a beta reader who has zero experience at it but does a fantastic job catching gaps/errors. Because he's dyslexic, he concentrates extra hard on every word/sentence.

 

[LadyVer]

I stumbled across a beta reader who has zero experience at it but does a fantastic job catching gaps/errors. Because he's dyslexic, he concentrates extra hard on every word/sentence.

Interesting. Sounds like you found a good VE.

 

[_Lynn_]

Interesting. Sounds like you found a good VE.

He catches gaps. Questions points that don't line up in his mind. But he doesn't do my editing. And he isn't from Lit.

 

[LadyVer]

He catches gaps. Questions points that don't line up in his mind. But he doesn't do my editing. And he isn't from Lit.

ah, well, I'm sure it's nice to find those who will help with the editing process, whether on Lit, or off.

 

[BreakTheBar]

Alright, I freely admit that just because a story doesn't LOOK like it's been edited doesn't mean someone didn't try to edit, and all the variables stemming from that. I will also say that many stories that do give one, two or even more 'editing' acknowledgements still look like the author said, "Aaaaan done."

It's interesting to here that many of you guys don't even view the Volunteer Editor program with that much positivity. I, like some others (though certainly not all), did my research before I decided to actually post something to Lit, including the program. I think I probably went through a good ten to fifteen pages of editor ads before e-mail three; only one got back to me at that point and after I sent the chapter she gave me a 'halfway done' update then poofed. I went back through the process a month later, contacted another few volunteers and ended up with someone who I truly believe is making my work better.

A good editor doesn't need to be a professional or even an english major/teacher. A good editor is someone who can read critically and isn't the author; as Lynn has seemed to find, it's about spotting gaps. Grammar/spelling, but also gaps in information or plot holes or cut corners.

That all being said, this thread IS about the number of people you use and not the quality of the program or the people in it.

It sounds like most of you have a single 'beta reader' at least, even if it's just another author giving a thumbs up and maybe some grammar/spelling misses. Does anyone have something more involved? Multiple beta readers, or a tiered system like editor->beta readers->then post? Or is that just way too much work for a free-to-read site?

 

[LadyVer]

Actually, I think the VE program is good. I have an active VE profile. The VE program could be better and it could be worse.

The main problem is that many VE's have a hard time finding the time to volunteer edit consistently. The other problem is that Lit hasn't come up with a way to cut the VE deadwood, those who sign up to edit and then become unavailable. It would be helpful if those who drop out would disable their VE profiles, but I doubt it's on their list of priorities.

 

[sr71plt]

A good editor doesn't need to be a professional or even an english major/teacher. A good editor is someone who can read critically and isn't the author; as Lynn has seemed to find, it's about spotting gaps. Grammar/spelling, but also gaps in information or plot holes or cut corners.

Umm, no. That's another set of eyes, not an editor. (And Lyn posted spotting gaps wasn't enough to be called an editor.)

I do have an editor for mine (not someone in the VE program) even though I am an editor. No one can edit themselves without missing a lot.

 

[lovecraft68]

Actually, I think the VE program is good. I have an active VE profile. The VE program could be better and it could be worse.

The main problem is that many VE's have a hard time finding the time to volunteer edit consistently. The other problem is that Lit hasn't come up with a way to cut the VE deadwood, those who sign up to edit and then become unavailable. It would be helpful if those who drop out would disable their VE profiles, but I doubt it's on their list of priorities.

I think the main problem with the VE program is the people who sign up on a whim, then decide its not for them for whatever reason, but can't take a minute to remove their profile or if someone contacts them have the courtesy to respond and say "no longer doing this, move along"

Its like anything else, its hit and miss, good and bad, and a lot of authors lose patience when the first couple they try to contact never shows up.

But just because someone is a VE does not mean they are not qualified there are plenty of people knocking around on this site as writers and editors with professional qualifications.

Most just don't find ways to bring it up on an hourly basis.