YouWriteOn

[Richard Turner]

Can I ask if any of you have used the YouWriteOn website? I know Agent Pete doesn't like it because he condemns their star marking system in his guide to the Houses. I ask because during February I gave and received many peer reviews and achieved high enough ratings in their system to get to the number one spot both in their "Top Ten" and in their monthly "Best Sellers". Naturally I got quite excited about this, thinking I might have found a route into publication. However, during March, though I continued to get good reviews and high ratings, I never appeared in either of their lists.

You get the impression that the whole thing is run by a capricious computer which shuffles its data around as it pleases. To me, the best thing about it is the concept of "assignment reviews". In order to get into their system you have very little choice in who or what you can review so are likely to get reviews from people who would not otherwise read your material. The flip side of this is that some of the reviewers are simply going through the motions. I have had much more thoughtful reviews from Litopia.

 

[Carol Rose]

I have no firsthand experience with the site, or with others like it, but I know there are plenty of them out there. The idea of doing critiques simply for the sake of racking up points so you can have your own critiques done is counterproductive. It leads to exactly what you said - people simply going through the motions. They do it because they have to, not because they want to.

I prefer Litopia's system because there's no incentive on the back end for anyone here to give another member a critique. In other words, they won't get something out of it for themselves. They're doing it because they want to, not because it's part of the game, or the system, or because they need X number of points or credits to get critiques done on their work.

 

[Richard Turner]

I have no firsthand experience with the site, or with others like it, but I know there are plenty of them out there. The idea of doing critiques simply for the sake of racking up points so you can have your own critiques done is counterproductive. It leads to exactly what you said - people simply going through the motions. They do it because they have to, not because they want to.

I prefer Litopia's system because there's no incentive on the back end for anyone here to give me a critique. In other words, they won't get something out of it for themselves. They're doing it because they want to, not because it's part of the game, or the system, or because they need X number of points or credits, or something along those lines.

Yes, I agree except that it is interesting to see comments from someone who is not interested in your style/genre etc. but still makes the effort to do a proper critique. There I've used the nasty word. I will have to accept that it does have its uses!

 

[Carol Rose]

Yes, I agree except that it is interesting to see comments from someone who is not interested in your style/genre etc. but still makes the effort to do a proper critique. There I've used the nasty word. I will have to accept that it does have its uses!

People here on Litopia critique outside the genre in which they write, too.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

I haven't been there, Richard, but that does seem a bit offhand in a way, and capricious.

 

[J. Rook]

Can I ask if any of you have used the YouWriteOn website? I know Agent Pete doesn't like it because he condemns their star marking system in his guide to the Houses. I ask because during Litopia.

I dislike (and distrust) the practice of starred reviews. It is nothing more than a marketing tool for the benefit of the electronic shopkeepers. When I wrote my first review for a book I had found in the Amazon shop I was astounded to find that the review could not be posted until I had coloured in the stars. Reviews that depend only on what has been written are the ones I want to read. On Amazon I found RD Blackmore's "Lorna Doone". One person who had bought the book "reviewed" it and gave it two stars because she found the language difficult to understand.

 

[Quillwitch]

Can I ask if any of you have used the YouWriteOn website? I know Agent Pete doesn't like it because he condemns their star marking system in his guide to the Houses. I ask because during February I gave and received many peer reviews and achieved high enough ratings in their system to get to the number one spot both in their "Top Ten" and in their monthly "Best Sellers". Naturally I got quite excited about this, thinking I might have found a route into publication. However, during March, though I continued to get good reviews and high ratings, I never appeared in either of their lists.

You get the impression that the whole thing is run by a capricious computer which shuffles its data around as it pleases. To me, the best thing about it is the concept of "assignment reviews". In order to get into their system you have very little choice in who or what you can review so are likely to get reviews from people who would not otherwise read your material. The flip side of this is that some of the reviewers are simply going through the motions. I have had much more thoughtful reviews from Litopia.

I was there for about a year, several year ago, i´m talking maybe 5. I had some really nice reviews, very thorough on 2 or 3 different texts that I posted there. I got some very good reviews and high ratings but never made it to the top pier. As you mention, the fact that you get random readers and randoms texts is a bit bothersome, especially because I write for children. The thing that bothers me most is that I have the nagging feeling that people there ripped off several of my ideas and now i´ve actually seen them published!
In the end, I got tired of the system.

 

[Richard Turner]

Thanks to all who advised on this. It doesn't look very positive.

 

[Richard Sutton]

Reminds me of the numbers chase on the old Authonomy, which was a mass-slush pile set up by Harpers. You could vote anybody up and the ranking competition was fierce, but I only connected with a couple of writers who had real writing chops or opinions that made any difference. YouWriteOn is such a automated slushpile where your popularity is supposed to give you a crack at an editors review. Supposedly.

 

[NickP]

ah, YWO and Authonomy. I've had an Editor's Desk review for 'Mirror In The Sky' from Authonomy and two random House reviews on YWO for 'The Shattered Mirror'. Authonomy was a bit of a game and YWO a bit of a lottery.

Ultimately it was fun but not too helpful! You have to accept the various readers' verdicts too, no use blaming the reader if they don't like what you write!