User blog comment:Zumokiworks335/CREEPYPASTA WIKI IS FOR PRO'S/@comment-5614678-20160713231140/@comment-24101790-20160714023647

This feels like a big circle of everyone taking things out of context and not reading them carefully and getting triggered. Let's all calm down and try to look at everything carefully. I'm saying that our QS is fine as it is and that the appeal generally works for users who put the time into revising their story and getting feedback. Dorkpool seems to support that idea and Mikemacdee is pointing out that using subjectivity as I means for dismissing things ("Quality is a pretty subjective thing.") is not a viable strategy. Doctor believes that appeals should be more lenient and that cliches can be used effectively, which they can, in the right context. Personally I stopped watching horror movie sequels due to re-hashed plots and tropes. Our Cliche page which was made through admin and user input does its best to point out commonly overused tropes in stories so it's a bit more objective.

A side note: 'retard' means to slow growth. ("Also the concept of quality being "totally subjective" is a very self-pleasing idea that retards intellectual discussion.") Let's not get the wrong idea about what flame-retardant is or take things out of context as it tends to paint everyone in a bad light. This is the same with incendiary comments on either side.

Basically, this all seems moot as the OP is looking to improve their writing and is willing to use the writer's workshop to do so when they have time to do so. Feel free to keep discussing the concept of quality and subjectivity, but I would assume most admins are in agreement that our standards really aren't too strict and that we have checks in place like the writer's workshop and the appeal to give authors second chances.