Bit of a whinge on bad netiquette Page 2

Quote: Blenkinsop @ March 16, 2008, 11:55 PM

James in answer to some of your points in no particular order.

I'm not having a go at people who take the time to critique per se. The "last straw" piece was not, I fear, triggered by you - and once again people don't seem to realise that I'm talking in general here. Why don't you read what I'm saying? The sketch I refer to was merely the catalyst that made me start the thread. It is inspired by many critiques of others' (not my) work.

In recent months I have read critiques of others' material that got side tracked into the most stupid and pointless sniping, quasi-philosophical and downright bloody stupid nonsense that I felt sorry for the poor original poster whose piece became of no consequence. Your own sitcom from a few weeks ago being a case in point.

How you can suggest that I wish to stifle any relevant comment on a sketch by what I have said here baffles me. I'm referring to the protracted discussions that develop about the rights and wrongs of any given topic as opposed to opinions on the actual piece itself.

My point on rewrites if you care to read it is on total rewrites. These IMO don't offer much by way of constructive criticism. It's saying "yeah your idea is OK but here's how you should do it cos I know better"

Offering suggestions for changing lines here and there is not so bad and a valid thing to do. But if one thinks that a piece is so badly written that one must change it all then a PM is more appropriate. We have writers of all ages and abilities on here and if a relatively young and inexperienced writer gets a savaging like that then it can have a very bad effect on them. Surely these (total redrafts) aren't the actions of a helping writers' community community? When I see total rewrites of writers work it really pisses me off big styleee.

And finally.

THIS EFFING POST IS NOT ABOUT MY WORK. IT'S ABOUT HOW WE COULD DO WITH THINKING ABOUT HOW WE USE THE CRITIQUE FORUM. THE CLUE IS IN THE TITLE - CRITIQUE

Sidebars as our American friends would have it are just that and for another thread as you have suggested yourself James.

That's me done on this thank you and good night and I love you all

*Dances off like Eric and Ernie*

View original

Hahaha, ok Blenks.

I wasn't really trying to be confrontational. I perfectly understand what you're trying to say. I'm not a moron. Honest! It was, however pretty clear from the thread in question that you were getting a little aggravated at any even slightly off-topic remark - go back and read it!

Perhaps you should calm down a bit!
I don't believe writing in emboldened caps is terribly good netiquette if we're being sticklers for it!!

No you're right it's not but when folks don't seem to grasp what you're saying what else can you do to ram home the point.

Sure, I was light-hearted in the critique thread eariler but was being a bit facetious trying to make a point.

Oh no! I've made another comment after saying I wouldn't. Feck it!!!!!!!

Quote: Blenkinsop @ March 16, 2008, 8:32 PM

Recently I have noticed that threads in critique forum have been sometimes hijacked into lengthy discussions about the relative merits of the subject matter rather than the piece of work itself.

Now although it's sometimes relevant to the sketch it frequently detracts and puts others off either leaving a comment or else being bothered to read the actual sketch. The writers' discussion forum exists for this kind of thing surely. I think we should try and keep this activity to a minimum.

Then we have other petty squabbles that also put people off and that are very frustrating. Bad enough if it's on their own threads but when they hijack someone else's thread to keep it going it really is ingnorant in the extreme. Take it outside kids why dontcha?

But worst thing of all is people who take it on themselves to do a total rewrite of somebody else's sketch.

Apart from it being fu**ing bad mannered it is rather, in most cases, unnecessary, almost always missing the point of the sketch by a mile as they don't know what the originator of the work had in mind. It also frequently prompts their claque to pitch in with "yeah that's a whole lot better!

Sure, the odd time a suggested re-write is appropriate but only when the originator actually asks for it, otherwise I think it is bad netiquette in the extreme.

People put their work up for comment if you want to talk about something else don't post on their threads. Start a new one in Discussion

I've said my two penn'orth and now I'll shut up

View original

Shucks... Writers have to get used to other people editing their work before it gets produced, so they might as well start learning that here.

Quote: billwill @ March 17, 2008, 12:20 AM

Shucks... Writers have to get used to other people editing their work before it gets produced, so they might as well start learning that here.

View original

God I want to go to bed but have to answer your comment Bill.

Yes writers do have to get used to editing but I think that the editing should be done in a supportive and helpful way. When a writer in a professional situation has their work edited it's done on a one to one basis. Surely the script editor doesn't go in front of the entire production team:

"Galton and Simpson have written something so awful that I'm going to have to rewrite it and show them where they've gone wrong. Aren't they silly billys?"

Surely it's about degrees here is it not? Yes, we all have to live with and get used editing but how it's handled is the key thing. I'm referring to basic good manners. It costs nothing and is something we should all strive for.

And now I've made another comment. Ahhhhhhhh! Double feck it!!

Well if someone re-writes your work and you don't feel its justified then ignore it or ask them to justify it. Many rewrites are done simply to get across the point the critiquer is trying to make.

If a thread is going off topic then ask for critiques. If it descends into a petty argument then tell a mod.

I don't think a writer should force a crtiquer to qualify his opinion before they give it. They are after all giving up their spare time to help you with your work.

I hate all this bloody stupid "thread etiquette" business. "Thread hijacking" is another term I find annoying.

Internet forums are meant to resemble real-life conversations, and in real-life conversation, topics DO get skewed and original points ARE lost and new ones made, and that's all fine. That's what conversation is, isn't it?

Quote: ajp29 @ March 17, 2008, 2:06 AM

Well if someone re-writes your work and you don't feel its justified then ignore it or ask them to justify it. Many rewrites are done simply to get across the point the critiquer is trying to make.

If a thread is going off topic then ask for critiques. If it descends into a petty argument then tell a mod.

I don't think a writer should force a crtiquer to qualify his opinion before they give it. They are after all giving up their spare time to help you with your work.

View original

Couldn't agree less with your point. If someone rewrites somebody's work totally, it's indicative of at best ignorance and at worst arrogance.

If the thread is going off topic then why is it? It's normally becuase some div or divs believe themselves to be more important or better than the work they are meant to be commenting on

Anybody with the rind to rewrite anybody's work in total is not helping anything except their own inflated ego.

Quote: Perry Nium @ March 17, 2008, 2:15 AM

I hate all this bloody stupid "thread etiquette" business. "Thread hijacking" is another term I find annoying.

Internet forums are meant to resemble real-life conversations, and in real-life conversation, topics DO get skewed and original points ARE lost and new ones made, and that's all fine. That's what conversation is, isn't it?

View original

Yeah, I hate all this bloody stupid having to "keep my manners in check" business in real life too but I manage most times. They're a real bummer rules (whether written, implied or unwritten) and conventions aren't they? Still.

And when on a plane that gets hijacked, although it's a bit irksome - what they hey? That's what you'll hear me say.

Although threads resemble conversations - in their simplest form they're really not are they?

All that's required is a little self-control, a modicum of respect and good manners wouldn't you say?

Well all I can think of for you to do Blen is ask the moderators to make it a rule. I certainly don't feel as strongly about it as you do and I reiterate my point that you shouldn't ask critiquers to respond only in a certain manner as it will restrict the likelyhood of honest critique.

If you can't persuade the moderators then simply state when you post your work that you do not want it to be re-written. This will solve your problem but I believe will also put alot of people off critiquing.

The off topic thing is a bit superficial as there are many pro-active things that you can do to get it back on track such as asking for critique of the sketch posted, reposting the sketch in the same thread and PMing the posters asking them to get back on track. These are simple and easy things to do.

However threads going off topic generally happen for two reasons. Either the sketch sparks off a debate or argument linked to the sketch or the sketch does not merit any lengthy critique e.g. its so good all people can say is 'wonderful sketch' etc or, of course, the opposite. So I gues my advice should be: to avoid going off topic, post averagely funny, uncontroversial sketches

Adam it's not about my work. It's about the forum in general. I don't know how many times I have to say this. My post in critique was the catalyst for this thread not the subject of it. Nobody rewrote it. Most making a comment seemed to like it.In fact I don't think any of my work has been rewritten in total ever. But I've seen it happening plenty of times elsewhere. That's what I think is wrong.

I suppose people will only read what they want into something but I think I'm OK as most of my sketches are averagely funny / unfunny and certainly never controversial

Quote: Blenkinsop @ March 17, 2008, 12:31 AM

God I want to go to bed but have to answer your comment Bill.

Yes writers do have to get used to editing but I think that the editing should be done in a supportive and helpful way. When a writer in a professional situation has their work edited it's done on a one to one basis. Surely the script editor doesn't go in front of the entire production team:

"Galton and Simpson have written something so awful that I'm going to have to rewrite it and show them where they've gone wrong. Aren't they silly billys?"

Surely it's about degrees here is it not? Yes, we all have to live with and get used editing but how it's handled is the key thing. I'm referring to basic good manners. It costs nothing and is something we should all strive for.

And now I've made another comment. Ahhhhhhhh! Double feck it!!

View original

Alan Moore has famously given up millions in revenues from his comics. After refusing to have anything to do with rewrites for movies. Apparently he fond them humiliating if only he'd used this site first.

Several members have commented about the need for the poster to be able to take criticism. I agree that a writer must be open to criticism. However, I have received criticism from a production company regarding some of my work and found it valuable and constructive. Some of the criticism on the critique forum do exactly what Blenky says. Fortunately, I do not feel the need to have my work recognised to feel I have written something that I am pleased with. On the other hand, there is value in a lot of the points that are raised by some members of BSG. I would suggest that if you just don't like a sketch or it's not to your taste, then you are not the person to offer advice.

My ego in fairness, does like people praising me to the heavens.
But from a practical point of view, it's often the people who didn't like it that I want to hear from. Why didn't you like it, what made it fail?

That's certainly the basis on which I give feedback. Often it's just a poor punchline, or maybe it's too long, or what ever. Simple things that can easily be corrected. Other times, it might be a good idea to start over from the beginning.
n.b. if I liked something, I think it helps to say why I liked it.

There is something a tad immature, about not being able to field criticism.

Also sometimes a sketch doesn't work. It just doesn't, and sorry but if some one tell's you that, then they're doing you a favour. It's worth bearing in mind, that the more offensive the material. The higher the chance of completely missing your audience. Or hitting the subject dead bang, comedy is a funny old business.

Quote: sootyj @ March 17, 2008, 10:22 AM

There is something a tad immature, about not being able to field criticism.

View original

There is Sooty but that's not what this is about really. It was a red-herring introduced earlier on in the thread (much to my irritation as it's taken it off topic ) and certainly had nothing to do with my having started the damn thing up.

In fairness to you, you always try and give constructive input.

Fully agree that if somebody feels that a sketch hasn't worked and can give a reason why in their opinion this is so, then that is the sort of crit we all need. If we agree with it so be it and good too if it's taken onboard, if we think that the crit is wrong we move on and don't come back trying to change our audience's mind. If they think it's crap it's their opinion and they're correct as far as it goes. I've said earlier you can't please all of the people all of the time.

Sometimes people will try and bait a poster with an abrupt put-down. It's not big and it's not clever and those who indulge in it should grow up.

The idea of the forum is to offer help and offer encouragement in a constructive and well- mannered way. If in doubt read SlagA's pinned notes at the start of the forum.

Well, I got to admit I'm with Blenks and Paul (globmod) here. Read the following as just my opinion.

Threads are not real-life analogues of conversation. For example, in real-life you speak, and give and get instant visual / aural feedback which you can use to correct your intended meaning if needed. On the net, there's a much more pre-meditated approach. The poster has time to think, read, and edit their response if needed BEFORE pressing 'send'. Even if there was a direct comparison, no one likes to be interrupted (even in real life): we all know what happens to the guy who keeps breaking into pub conversations - he doesn't get asked out much and everyone groans when he sits at the table. In real life there are penalities for disobeying a group's rules (however liberal and informal those rules are) but they are often accepted at a subconscious level as part of the payoff of being accepted by that group, whether it's a business community, a pub quiz team, etc. Making an appeal to 'Aren't rules a pain' is poor logic because we all take advantage of rules when they suit us yet we whinge when they don't. When someone's behaviour is irritating, even the most anarchic of us will check to see what rule they've broken. Even the best anarchists can't escape the social contract.

Personally, taking over someone's thread is rude, whatever term you choose to put on it. Crit someone's work in the crit section - post random conversation in the General forum. Surely the clue is in the forum name and the original post when it comes to the subject matter in your reply?

Occasionally suggesting a funny line is good and it leaves the writer the opportunity to take or leave the suggestion. Rewriting and having that rewrite being critted in place of the original post has occasionally cropped up as an irritating problem that seems to be getting worse. I'm not pointing fingers here, either. Most of us have been too keen to 'help', on occasions. But if a thread opens up a new idea for you, making a new post and pasting a link to the original sketch that triggered your idea seems the best way to pay back.

I don't think Blenkinsop's issue is about the nature of the crit just the way a thread is sometimes diverted from its original aim.