Status of posts in Writing Groups Directory

Not open for further replies.


Oct 17, 2018
Hopefully this is the right place to float an idea about the Writing Groups Directory. Would it be possible to add new prefixes in place of 'writer seeks readers'? These could indicate whether the writer is still looking for a critique, has posted a revision, has added a new chapter, is temporarily no longer seeking critiques because they are revising the posted draft, or has finished requesting critiques.

As well as making the status clear at a glance, it might also prevent confusion when revisions are posted farther down the thread, since it's easy to miss them. Or it might be an idea for writers to indicate in the thread title or first post whether a new revision/chapter is available farther down at 'post number X'.

Alternatively, there could be a simple traffic light system of green (please critique!), amber (on pause while redrafting) and red (critique no longer required).

Or maybe it's just me who gets confused? :D
I agree that the current thread prefixes in the Writing Groups are somewhat redundant. They're a bit of a hangover from a previous version of the site. But I wonder if having a range of choices would really help. Perhaps it would be better to do away with the prefixes entirely, and let the thread title (which you can edit whenever you like) do all the work. I don't know. I'm thinking on the fly.

The thread creation date is always a good indicator of how likely an author is to still require critique. And of course you can ask in the thread. But I do understand the desire for an at-a-glance system.

In a way, there already is one. Thread creators in that area of the forum can lock threads, make them private, restrict access to a selected group, delete them altogether. You have a fair degree of control as to how people interact with threads you create there. And everyone makes their own choices. Personally, whether or not I'm working with an open or closed group, I always delete my threads once they've served their purpose, or at least close them to all but me if I want to refer back to them. I don't like leaving old versions of my work hanging around on the internet. If I was posting a revised version of a piece, I might start by deleting, or closing, the old thread, and then create a new private thread inviting those who had collaborated with me on the first version. Later, if I felt it necessary, I might open that thread to everyone, or create a new one.

The permeations are endless. And I don't think any particular workflow has more value than another. It all comes down to what works for you.

What does everyone else think? Should we expand the range of available prefixes, do away with them altogether, something else?
Tools are in place. I'd edit the thread titles or delete. Peter's recommendation has been that once the exercise is complete so far as the writer is concerned, and though it's a protected area, not publicly available to browse, to take down the thread for privacy and security. Start a new thread with your newer work if you'd like to test out your MS changes.
My initial thought was, yeah, it's a good idea, but Rich has a point--the tools are there. I've tended to ask for people willing to review something, without posting the document itself, and then have started a separate, private thread with just those people who indicated they'd do it. And then I've tried to take those down when I'm done. So that works for me fine as a writer. As a reader, yeah, it would be nice if there was more indication of who actually wants more feedback. But, then, I've been so absent from that forum recently, I'm probably not the right person to comment. Crossing my fingers 2019 will be a better year and I can be more active.
Not open for further replies.