Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-4833240-20140301051701/@comment-24077689-20140304204620

Princess Callie wrote: Xelrog T. Apocalypse wrote: Princess Callie wrote: When you're dealing with people in their teens, they don't take "neutral" criticism seriously. A criticism should not just be objective; it should be mixed, and for good reason. The writer says "writing is subjective bro." Whenever they say that, it's not because they're an idiot, it's because they refuse to take it seriously. Right. An idiot. That's what I said.

Subjective is subjective. Objective is objective. There is no turning one into the other. Even critical analysis is technically subjective.

But do you honestly believe that starting a review with "This fucking sucks" or any similar statement is going to invoke change in that person? That it will make them want to become a better writer, or take it more seriously? You don't think it will just make them think, "Well this guy's just an asshole," and stop reading right there? That it will do anything but make them immediately put up resistance?

Because I can assure you that that first sentence is where most people would just stop reading. Here's an idea: Why not stop criticizing people all together? Think for a moment. You're going to get a reaction from pointing out one thing wrong no matter how neutral you get. They're going to think you're just an asshole who's trying to downgrade your story.

It doesn't matter how nicely you do it unless you literally just make them feel good about themselves. At the same time, they're going to try to prove you wrong, and show that they are or want to be a great writer. And that's how you weed out the great and willing future writers from the people who don't give a shit and already think they're better than everyone else.

There was a kid once who Guy and I tried to help named Justin. Justin in the end thought we were a bunch of elitist assholes. Why? Because his stories kept getting deleted and every mistake laid out to him over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again. His words when we were nice: "There's nothing wrong with it. You're just being silly, because I know the rules." <--- True Story, too.

Being nice didn't get the point across. Being neutral would draw a reaction either way.

"Oh, there's nothing wrong with it. You're silly."

"YOU ARE AN ELITIST ASSHOLE TRYING TO DOWNGRADE ME CAUSE MY PASTA IS BETTER THAN YOURS!"

Then we have people who actually want to improve and take criticism. Thanking us for being honest, and trying to prove us wrong about their writing skills. I constantly get the "you're just jealous because I have x amount of stories and you only have the one and all of mine are better than yours. And it's just like "ho ho ho, OK". That's usually about the time I start copying and pasting some of the comments my story has gotten.

You know what? I am an elitist asshole. These stories should be scrutinized in a goddamn Battle Royale system, only the best should survive. I see nothing wrong with that. Strict guidelines must be followed, that's why the featured stories and the ones that most of us call "really good" actually fucking are really good.

Nah, tho. My favorites are the white knights. Like Guy and I were reviewing this really shitty poem and this kid came in, not the author, like "hey guys, poetry is subjective if he likes it he likes it leave him alone". STOP DEFENDING BAD ART.