Grassroots Disc, Mark James, 11-21-04; SDC common queue

[Mark James]

Slander

Hi Mark,

This is a 'grassroots' effort in this forum, with no 'moderating' going on.

I see your anger and various responses to it. Perhaps you were unprepared for any detailed critique. You are a newcomer, and need some time to 'season' and understand the 'customs' of this forum.

I have not yet read the story, so nothing I say has to do with the merits or demerits of your story, or with the accuracy or inaccuracy of criticism.

Two of your comments stand out, though I realize many times you were more gracious:

Charley:

As a general comment on your comments, I find that you lack imagination as a reader. You seem to read stories the way English Professors read papers. That's not a slam, just an observation. That being the case, I found that your comments were just this side of useless for reasons which I will enumerate below.
------

"I did not find your comments on the mechanics of the story to be useful." would have sufficed. It's inappropriate to 'characterize' Charley, whom you don't know.

Further, I think picky readers should be thanked, since word choice, punctuation, even spelling, contribute to the overall impression. EVEN readers who list misplaced commas (hopefully in a PM) have great usefullness.
------

If Charley doesn't want to risk being publicly insulted, then she shouldn't try to use her skill with words to shred someone's work needlessly.

That's a mistake Mark. It makes you sound like the avenging angel. If (hypothetically) she said your story was crap, you are entitled to say the critique was crap. Person-directed insult simply is not called for or appropriate. In fact, of course, she didn't simply apply a label to your story. She made a couple positive comments.

I personally would have like to see more that was positive, but that's her option.

In closing, we all do well to exercize a degree of supportiveness. Everyone needs encouragement. I have felt discouraged at times, in reading certain critiques. YET, no doubt, sometimes I've hurt someone's feelings. These incidents have to be moved past, and apologized for, where necessary. Most criticisms, as Black said, are worth some calm thought, when possible.

Although I'm simply directing traffic here, I think a number of posters will agree with a firm request that

all 'characterization', insults, and negatives(flames) addressed to the *person* are TO BE AVOIDED by both authors and critics.

We are discussing a piece of text. The text, occasionally, may be greatly flawed, though we have high quality here, quite often.

The critiques may, themselves be flawed, or simply presented in an impolitic manner. Authors are free to point out such flaws IN THE CRITIQUE, though 'rebuttals' are probably not all that useful in many cases.

Where a critic, for example, finds the topic or genre to be displeasing, they should state that, as an introduction, and at the extreme, decline to proceed to comment. It's enough, in certain cases simply to say, "That's not my cuppa tea."

I'd like to hear others' comments, since the above is not given as authoritative orders, but as collegial advice.

The aim is maximal benefits for all.

Pure,

I thank you for your kind advice. Presently, I must address a more serious matter with you. As moderator of this forum, I would like to point out to you that CharleyH has used this forum to engage in a criminal act.

I did not post any comments whatsover regarding any of her stories that are posted on Lit. or elsewhere in the internet or any other public forum.

As I pointed out in my reply to CharelyH, I am a published writer. As such, my name is my income. CharleyH has used this website to commit criminal violations, namely slandering my name (lying) and defamation of character in writing (libel).

You may want to post additional advice which warns against the legal implications of engaging in slander/libel in the public arena, especially in writing.


Your kind attention to this very serious matter is greatly appreciated,
Mark James

 

[Mark James]

Re:

Even comments that at first seem off the mark can have their value. When "Letters from the Hesperus" was up for review, I did receive some comments, both publically posted and privately, that I initially resisted and very nearly dismissed. Some of them still appear to me to be off the mark; one person in particular seemed to have a very different idea of what the story should be about, and it was not the first time I thought that that individual had badly misread a story.

With time, however, I learned to see that we simply wanted quite different things out of erotic fiction. Once I'd realized where the author was coming from, I was able to look past our differences in opinion on what the work should accomplish and realize that there were, in fact, useful elements to the critique. It was especially helpful to lay it side-by-side with other comments that had seemed more immediately applicable and to seek out the common threads. Once I did, I found myself surprised but grateful as I ended up incorporating suggestions even from a review that at first, admittedly, I resented and dismissed.

Fortunately, I kept those thoughts to myself. I am very glad now that I did. They would have shown the weakness of my own approach and would have offended a generous and insightful reviewer whose critical skills helped me to improve my work.

Shanglan

Shanglan:

I understand the point you're making. However, if you think that my comments to CharelyH were motivated by anger, you're quite wrong. My comments were motivated by the fact that the critique was not intended to provide constructive feedback. It was intended to display verbal skill which she used with malicious intent to characterize a subject to which she has personal objections.

If you have any doubts as to her malicious intentions, please see the thread in which she slanders my name, without reason, with a false accusation of posting profane obscenities to the Lit. page which contains her story. This is a person who will engage in criminal behavior in a malicious attempt to destroy someone's name.

What possible value could a critique from such a person have?

I appreciate your comments, however, my response to CharleyH was not motivated by anger. As a writer, particularly of gay S&M that is on the edge, I do not expect every person to agree with the views that are present in my writing. However, I will not allow anyone to use a critique as a vicious, malicious reponse to my writing.

Mark James

 

[CharleyH]

Re: Slander

Originally posted by Mark James

Do not threaten me. I took a bit of law with that English degree you claim I have . I do not know what your problem is, but I wish you luck in dealing with it.

Out of respect for my fellow authors, I do not want this to be a forum for your misplaced anger. I had removed my posts from this thread to keep with the same intended spirit I made my original post: positive exchange. However, have decided to repost on some very good advice. With the exception of a deleted quote, nothing has changed

I stand by every word that I have said.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Re: Re:

I understand the point you're making. However, if you think that my comments to CharelyH were motivated by anger, you're quite wrong. My comments were motivated by the fact that the critique was not intended to provide constructive feedback. It was intended to display verbal skill which she used with malicious intent to characterize a subject to which she has personal objections.

It's a shame that this has all gone this way. I hate to see a forum that has been of immense value to me lose its focus and degenerate into these sorts of threats and allegations. However, I have to disagree with you on the value of Charley's original post and the weighting of your response. I've seen many stories reviewed here, some gently and some ... shall we say, "thoroughly." I've never seen anyone react with, frankly, the level of unpleasant defensiveness and hostility that you did, and I think that the forum reactions bear me out in my belief that you made this problem yourself. If you'll notice, there is not a single detailed feedback post after your attack on Charley. Whatever your purpose was in posting that, it's achieved only one clear goal: it's convinced quite a lot of other people that it's not worth their time to comment on your work.

Finally, might I say that you make something of an assumption in your repeated references to publication. I'm very pleased for you, naturally, and am glad that your literary endeavours have met with success. However, this is not a license to behave in a high-handed fashion to those who choose to disagree with you. You are in fact surrounded by published authors; several post regularly on this forum. Because they seek sincere and honest input, most of them don't mention their publication; they are interested in developing their writing, as all good authors are. Might I suggest that their example is worthy of emulation.

Shanglan

 

[Pure]

Hi Mark,

I'm not a moderator, but I do see two issues. 1) the original critique, 2) an accusation of your saying something nasty, elsewhere.

I see nothing improper in the critique. As to what you supposedly said elsewhere, I haven't seen it. I'm unaware what evidence Charley had. It's possible, I suppose, that she linked two rather nasty postings as being from the same person, when there are in fact two different persons. I believe that 2), however represents a diversion from the main discussion.

In any case, I gather 2) is no longer posted, so that problem has moved off center stage.

I can't really approve of your 'personal' remarks as I quoted. It seems that several people believe you, in places, were out of line.
It's up to you, what, if anything you make of it.

The amount of temper and animosity obscures the main issues. You need to take a break and calm down. So far, I don't see any bit of 'light' in your self defense, since you're painting yourself entirely white. Even assuming you're 90% right, it would become you to concede the 10% and even remove those particular items. It would make you seem more of a mensch.

As to all the legal stuff, libel, slander, etc. It happens; have a look at the general board. Also lots of 'flaming' occurs, which probably does not rise to the level of 'crime.' You need to get past it, *by not responding in kind.* Indeed, the posters of really shitty things usually disgrace themselves without there being a rebuttal or counter-flame.

As a member of literotica, you're free to attempt to interest the owners, Laurel and Manu, in your situation. You might, however, consider whether some words (*of that sort*) posted for a couple days could ever be proven to have inflicted damage on someone's reputation, livelihood, etc. Laurel herself has been called a stupic c*** and apparently lived through it (took no action, afaik).

Personally, I say many of your comments, being totally of the self righteous variety have inflicted far more damage on your reputation than anything Charley might have said. By not remaining cool and polite, you've lost much sympathy.

I'd prefer you PM me any response to this, though I can't force it.

I encourage all to stop the fighting, and return to substance.

Please no one post further criticisms of Mark or his behavior if he ceases personal-issue-related postings forthwith.

{Added 11-29 12:30 EST: I'm not attempting to close off discussion of Mark's story, its merits and demerits. On-topic postings are welcome. I'm solely calling for closing off of all threats, indictments, self justifications, insults, and 'characterization' of persons.}