Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-4833240-20140301051701/@comment-4832646-20140304165314

Noothgrush wrote: I got a note on my account claiming my "severity is refreshing", if that means what I think it means then at least someone is appreciating how I review. I'm a very harsh critic and a lot of the time it's not the writers that give me trouble. It's other commentors.

Seriously, for some of these dumber writers it seems like my lengthy, in depth, highly detailed review of their work which is harsh, biting, and severe is totally invalidated because of lazy commentors who come in with a fucking 9/10 rating, even when the writer isn't using the proper tense or forms of "there". It's absolutely maddening.

I can see where you're coming from with the swearing thing. I can. I get it, it creates a hostile atmosphere. But guess what? Peer review is fucking hostile. Critics need to be hostile and harsh. My usage of expletives sometimes borders on the excessive, I admit, but sometimes the visceral nature of that can really get through to people.

My number 1 word in critiques is totally "juvenile". For people that understand it, I feel like having your work called juvenile is pretty insulting. I've told people that their stories need to be rewritten from the ground up and then that it still probably wouldn't be that great because in all honesty the concept doesn't make any fucking sense. People need to hear that.

All that being said, I was an always will be a proponent of making the standards harsher. This is the exact point I was trying to make. The standards are far from tough; the criticism should be so in turn, particularly when you refuse to put effort into it.