Board Thread:General Wiki Discussion/@comment-4833240-20140301051701/@comment-4832646-20140304230258

Xelrog T. Apocalypse wrote: Princess Callie wrote: WhyAmIReadingThis wrote: Not to flatter myself or something, but I'm almost completely sure that the reason I don't get story butthurtness (that is, if I'm contacted) is that I reply nicely and naming all the flaws comprehensively. It's true there has been several who has came to me in a rage, all 'why did you delete it you corrupt admin' and all that, but after I tell them what was wrong they apologize about their outburst. Sure, there has been exceptions, but they have been pretty rare. You're a rare case. Pointing out the flaws comprehensibely still got me ranted at. I just tend to ignore ranting comments nowadays. Unless it is so beyond ridiculous I have to comment back. (Don't expect me to be nice if you're that much of a jerkass.) "Don't expect me to be nice if you're that much of a jerkass, but expect me to be a jerkass about your bad story without any prior provocation from you personally."

That about right?

Any kind of negative criticism will get you angry rants. This is because people are stupid and don't know how to take any kind of negative criticism. Their reaction to your negative criticism will not change whether you're aggressive or not. The only difference is that when you go out of the starting line acting abrasive then it's an asshole arguing with another asshole.

All you can do is hope that the author of the story you're reviewing is one of the 5% who DO react positively to criticism. By being abrasive, you're cutting that number down to the 0.5% who respond to needlessly aggressive criticism. I should probably point out that many times in the past I have said if you want me to or not, if I criticize your pasta, expect it to be torn apart, chewed up and spat back out, etc, if I have the honest opinion that it is bad.

The point of being abrasive is expressive to how you feel. If you give a shit story, you should expect to get a harsh criticism. That simple.