User blog comment:EtherBot/Let's Talk Deletion!!!/@comment-24101790-20170210025912/@comment-24101790-20170210042323

"My point was that "The Workshop" is a weird slow process where even if you get somebody full on like "Good job thumbs up" you aren't guarenteed that your story won't be deleted." So what you're saying is that this method of deletion/review is negatively impacting users who don't revise their stories and seek approval from people who are familiar/skilled in the process...? My prayers go out to you/them.

"Casual writers with good ideas probably won't care much to have their story deleted, take it over to the WW, have it reviewed, make some edits, have it reviewed again, make some edits, finally be happy with it, and finally submit it again." Yup. If they're happy enough to submit it after having spent time on it, why is this a bad thing? We tend to tun down stories that fail to do this, so why is this a costing point?

"I'm not saying the concept of our system is flawed on paper (Sic) but in execution I think it honestly does discourage a lot of writers from diving headfirst into this community. If other people think that makes them closeminded or unwilling to get better and they shouldn't be part of this community anyway because of that, than that's sort of valid but I just don't see it that way. Open. I think this community really could feel more open to newcomers." I'm sorry, but part of creating/growing into a community is based on improving oneself. Why exactly should we accept the dozens of stories who fail basic English/story-telling on the basis of equality when we have systems set up to help them? It'd be like a college giving diplomas out to every student because they did the minimal amount of work. Your existence does not result in approval.

Put in the work damnit, you can do better.