Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:11:36 +0700

Since our old thread got locked I figured I'd put up a new one. But really I think we should just figure out a way to organize outside of the nanowrimo boards, in some glorious land of waving green electrons where we can bitch about whatever we want, however we want, and where the Edit buttons are plentiful. Maybe a facebook group or something? I like Google+ better, but I don't know that it has the capability for such a thing. Suggestions? Further rants?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

LittleMissZilla — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:35:47 +0700

I was looking through Facebook earlier to see if anyone had already made one. I'd be up for it, but when it comes to message board pals I've found that a lot of people don't want to do the Facebook groups because they prefer to remain relatively anonymous. Still, I'd be down. If they'd even let me in. I did a cheer for Shem on one of the other threads, so there's a chance I'm blacklisted.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 07:40:05 +0700

I totally agree. Wholeheartedly. The thread was a place I came to for laughs, fine sarcasm (it's like a nice merlot, but better), and the safety in realizing that I was not alone in the things that frustrated me. Whenever I was stuck in my novel, a nice jaunt to the PoC's thread was just what I needed to find the snarky attitude I needed to keep me going. So, snarky attituders unite! Let's ditch the drama and get back to what is important: quality writing. I am by no means a programmer or anything like that, but I did find some free software on the web to create our own forum. In the meantime, I would be amenable to a FB page. I don't have any experience with G+, but would be willing to learn if it's what everyone else would pick.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 08:48:31 +0700

I'm down with G+ or maybe a Yahoo! Group? A livejournal comm? Something? Bueller?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:01:47 +0700

If we all made the same circle on Google+ we could just post to it. The cynic's thread was the reason I kept using this forum so much during the writing. But I don't need to deal with the championing of bad logic and emotionally-driven perceptions. My Google+ name is Lily Alice.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:05:47 +0700

Or someone could just make a Google+ page and only people from here could circle and use it. I'm on my kindle fire so I can't easily do it.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:16:13 +0700

I'll give it a shot. I haven't played with G+ much, but it'll give me something to do for now.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:22:56 +0700

Google+ has a pretty cool groups option. Do you think we should do something like that? If we do, I need your email addresses. If you send me it in NaNo, I can invite you to the group.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:27:12 +0700

FYI It is REALLY easy to create a group in G+. I made it restricted access only, so you have to let me know if you want in. I'll be checking my messages here at least twice a day

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

CarrieClothwright — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:27:33 +0700

I'd do G+ but being a pissed off cynic with a nosy Mom and tons of past, present, and future students on FB, I won't be joining you over there. Ok so maybe I'm inconsistent. You got a problem with that? I do agree that it would be great to have a way we can continue to communicate, 'cause this was fun. Plus, I'm counting on zenken to help me keep up my exercise regime.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:31:57 +0700

Because I am really (really) bored, I also created a FB page... LOL I might just need a life...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:14:00 +0700

I don't do Facebook. But no one on Google+ can see anything you do unless you allow them to, anyway, by having them in a circle that you're posting go.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:15:05 +0700

Posting TO. Anyway, yay. Thanks Darbrashelle.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:15:44 +0700

Okay, I feel like an idiot, but how do I post in the google+ group? There doesn't appear to be a button for making a new topic or replying to an existing one anywhere.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:39:01 +0700

Bwahaha. I noticed that too. And then I noticed that I had navigated outside Google+ and was in the dreaded Google territory. So, I will soon be deleting that and have made a new group in google+ for reals this time. If you ask, I'll mail you my name so you can add yourself to my circle. I'm so full of FAIL today I all I can do is laugh at me.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:55:19 +0700

Alright if you google+ this is it: https://plus.google.com/110123525617930153819

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

VirtuallyCJ — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 21:16:02 +0700

Hey you guys, one who knows of which you speak through another experience and just wanted to pop in, empathize and say- well, what I would like to say is perhaps best left unsaid. How about this instead - fuck em if they can't take a joke.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mermaidsong — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:54:19 +0700

Socialgo is a good social network making deal where you can use your nano nicknames and keep going. There's a free version that's awesome. If someone makes one, post here.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Scratchingcat — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 23:52:51 +0700

Somehow I expected Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons to show up in here.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:55:33 +0700

Ever go back and watch Die Hard? It's still pretty good, in my opinion. Big hair, pagers, fire hoses and all.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:19:25 +0700

I have to say I'm looking forward to Nano: Year 5. I'm not sure if I want to go back and do Part 2 of Book 2, but I have the option of doing something new and different. This first book is a lot of research and quite a bit of work just by itself. Also, I might do fantasy, only because I can write a lot more words without having... eh nevermind. Too much effort to make the joke without someone getting a wedgie. Ideas stored in my head: 1. Alien story disguised within a superhero premise. 2. Future détective noir - dark futuristic detective story with robots. 3. Short story/treatment fantasy story. Written as a pilot episode, but can be lengthened to a full novel. Neither are fully fleshed out, but there's enough of each one to write 50,000 words. I'm not sure how to describe each without referring to something that was done before. E.g. for Future detective - Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? + Maltese Falcon + Altered Carbon + Neuromancer + Pat Novak: For Hire. That doesn't explain it at all and it feels like a bad pitch when I do. [For anyone who wants really good metaphors, listen to old detective radio shows. Pat Novak has been the best I've heard so far. Here's one of my favorite lines: 'She's pushing 40 so hard she's bruising it.']

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:28:14 +0700

Literally just remembered, last year I did one about a woman who took a course in "How to write a novel in 30 days." I even had her checking out a forum, but spending little time at it because many of the other participants drove her a little crazy...whoops. I didn't finish that story because I got bored with it, gave her a mystery to solve, realized that while I love to read mysteries, I'm not super at setting them up, and, etc. But I still think it's a neat concept...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:44:02 +0700

I'm no where near the age of 30, but I'm a pissed off cynic, so I hope I can hang around here. I've decided hanging around the All-Ages-Coffeehouse is a bad idea since none of them can handle being questioned. I questioned someone about the real reasons why her boyfriend broke up with her and the next thing I know, five different people are accusing me of being insensitive and an ass. All because I tried to work this out from the boyfriends point of you. I hate my age group. Does anyone else experience this kind of group attack just for stating your opinion?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 07:01:15 +0700

"So why not slow down, and have the maximum experience?" I learn something here every year. This year I learned (such a decades-long story) I still get to be me, okay to be even more me, instead of less. Whether I will is still an open question.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

TheGildedFox — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 04:31:31 +0700

Is it okay to rant and complain about the *practice* of using NaNo to write one million+ words with no accounting for quality if we don't actually talk about specific *people* that are doing it? Because I understand why the thread got locked, but I think that's a pretty big part of WHY the PoC group exists...for those of us that take writing a little more seriously than a word count game. I think its a valid thing to question about these practices, ESPECIALLY considering how the professional writing/publishing industry views NaNo as some sort of child's play or amateur hour. For those of us that believe that when properly used, it can be a useful tool, being associated with the so-called over-achievers can be disheartening. We should at least be able to voice our opinion over it, in the hopes that it might inspire others to take the month seriously and put down the ninjas, fourth-wall breaking author monologues, and other devices whose soul purpose is to boost word count. I have been looking for an excuse to join up with google+ but I have no other friends that are using it so I don't know... We'll see if I see you around.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 09:01:18 +0700

It isn't about who can type what, and it never was. It was just about how our goals differ and in what way.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Incorporal — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 02:20:57 +0700

Can you guys imagine trying to slog through a million words that need editing? Even if it's not all crap? I'm just sayin. My crap-to-good ratio is about 1000 for every 10,000 words. So, um, I'm not a math person but that means only 5,000 words of my novel is crap. Even if someone else's crap-to-good ratio is the same--and if it was typed ten times as fast, that's NOT very likely--that means...uh...they have 100,000 words of crap to re-write or throw out. Right? Better get to work, astronomical-word-count people!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrWriteon — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:56:34 +0700

Damn!! This was hard! I hardly made the 50,000 word requirement.My (unfinished) entire novel is crap as far as I'm concerned, but I"m sure I can complete it soon. Crap-to-good ratio? Really, who can say. I will finish though. As far as what anyone has to say about it ? I can only say that it is all just opinion. It has been my understanding that this is about "Just Write" and edit later. So what if it's padded some. I have a full time job, a family, and have to write in what precious spare time I have left. This doesn't leave much time for editing. But really though, I think a lot of you people just try to change the rules as you go. But hey, do whatever it takes to make yourselves feel better. Right?

Moderator Note

Dragonchilde — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:09:55 +0700

If you would like to continue the discussion, let's move away from determining whether or not the efforts of others are valid or worthy. As someone upthread (thank you!) noted, this is a self challenge. Your challenge is not mine, and theirs is not yours. Many people are not here for publishable, or even quality work. They just want to have fun. It's okay to be okay with that. If this thread ventures back into being abusive to others or violates our Codes of Conduct, I will shut it down permanently, and there will be no part three. Let's not get to that point, okay? The purpose of this challenge is not to write a masterpiece, something publishable, or even something coherent. It's to challenge yourself to write a novel in 30 days, a rough draft. Anything beyond that is simply a personal challenge, and isn't something you should waste time worrying about.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:31:56 +0700

I'd just like to point out a few things in reference to the supposed poor publishers who'll have to wade through things. First, there have been tons and tons and TONS of threads about fellow NaNo folk who are *terrified* of letting *anyone* else read what they've written. Most simply did it because they wanted to, because it was fun, or just to see if they could...and honestly, there's nothing wrong with that. Second, a lot of them who said they *do* want to publish said they'd also consider self-publishing before going to an actual publishing house. That means that they are their own editors, or that they've either hired a free-lance editor or gotten a friend or relative to be their editor. It also means they also may not be wanting to publish in order to gain great fame and infamy, but rather that they simply want to share their fiction (or poems or recipe books or what-have-you) with friends and relatives. Third, I think we're approaching the "You're not a REAL ____ if you don't ____!" thresh-hold. If I write a poem just for my husband for our anniversary, then I'm being a writer. If a 13-year-old writes raunchy Naruto fan-fiction, then they are being a writer. And that's perfectly fine, whether it's for practice to become a published author, or if it's simply for fun and a creative outlet. In the end, I don't see the point in being uber-srs about NaNo to the point that you stop having fun and start judging others. If you aren't doing it for fun, or just for your own personal goals, but rather to "prove" you are somehow better than others, then I think you've missed the point entirely IMHO. Maybe try going easy on others who don't live up to your expectations. Maybe you'll even find you go easier on *yourself*. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 02:33:40 +0700

I'm going to make a few closing remarks, and then I'm going to endeavor not to return to this particular thread. One of the reasons I've really enjoyed the NaNo forums (and you good Cynics will have to forgive me for this) is that there *is* such a focus on staying positive, upbeat, and encouraged instead of the usual crud of ornery dissatisfaction that permeates most forums on the Internet. It's been *incredibly* refreshing for me to find a place on the 'Net where folks want to help and encourage one another, rather than put each other down. Call me a "fluff bunny" for this if you must (though that's far from the truth IRL). :) As for being a "serious" writer, I assumed that what was meant here, in this thread, by "serious" was equated to being published. However, that doesn't seem to be the case, which makes things......really, really confusing. I, for one, consider myself a serious writer right now. And no, I didn't ascribe to every single suggestion from the pep talks at all....but that doesn't mean there was something inherently *wrong* with those suggestions, even for a serious writer. As I said, there's serious writers outside of the Cynic threads, just as there are non-serious ones. That's just the way it is. I imagine that's the way it's been since long before NaNo existed: There were folks who wrote "for serious", and folks who wrote for fun. Sometimes those who start out writing just for fun end up publishing their books and making a pretty good career out of it. And sometimes the serious writers decide they don't really like their story or the idea of publishing, and go on to do something else. And that's okay. Mr.BadgerPants: You've misquoted me, I'm afraid. I said that, as far as where you personally are coming from, I can understand the opinion that NaNo may not be for professional writers. I did *not* say (or intended to say) that I wholly agreed with you. :) In the end, I think there's a point at which it's possible to take this entire competition far, FAR more seriously than it was ever intended....and I feel that point has been reached. With a vengeance. As for why the OLL didn't meet their goal, I'd be more willing to bet it's because of the economy than of any opinions anyone out there has. (Though I'm far from willing to get into an economic debate concerning it.) And yes, I'm sure publishers become a bit more swamped. But, I'm not sure what the point of saying that is exactly. Does that you think less NaNites should attempt to publish their books? Do you think it means more folks should self-publish? Is it simply a fact you are sharing? And who are these unknown publishers that are so woefully stressed? Doubleday? Penguin? Random House? Do I need to send these poor, over-worked publishers some cookies to apologize for all the extra manuscripts? Should I go to their offices in New York and offer my assistance? I'm not really certain what my response to that is meant to be, to be honest. :) Anyways, I'm sorry that NaNo hasn't lived up to each of your expectations. However, I hope that you'll go on to write even more....with or without NaNo....and I truly wish each and every one of you as much success as you want. ^_^ (P. S. Yes, I'm aware there's probably some points that I didn't make about some things that someone said, but truth is, I find all the vehemence a bit confusing, at best. If I didn't address specifically what you wanted me to, then feel free to PM me for a more personal discussion of it all. However, I do not intend to return to any Cynic thread in the future. (Getting away from Cynics was one of the main reasons I am avoiding sites like Gaia Online. I'm just tired of the melancholy..))

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:15:14 +0700

I think everyone who participates in Nano needs to understand that there are a million participants now and that means you're going to have both the types who take it Seriously and the types who do just take it for Fun. (And by no means are they mutually exclusive in all cases.) It's the internet, forum space is nigh-unlimited, and there's room for both types here. The problem I have is with the censorship being expressed by the mods for no reason. Yes, Dragonchilde, I am talking to you since you wield that stick. So long as the communications do not reach the level of cyberbullying, of which I am happy to provide you with the legal definition, or proceed to spillover into direct confrontations with individuals, then the harm is minimal. People should be allowed to have opinions other than "Yes, I'm awesome and you are too!" There is very little that is productive about that, even in terms of confidence building because it's blatantly false and self-serving. Nano, by its very CHARTER cannot be just for the silly ninja-dares and Rah Rah Rah and No Criticism. Nano's primary purpose is not the adult November novel month. All that money we raise is for a very SERIOUS purpose: It's going to create educational programs in schools. That's why they're hiring new leadership - to get them into schools and teach our kids how to love reading and writing and it's to teach them how to write in a competent manner as a professional - not a professional writer, as a professional, functioning member of the future work force. Yes, you can do this in a fun way, which is what Nano does. But to deny that Nano's business is, at its core, a serious business, is naive and or disingenuous. Also, frankly, writing is about criticism. You write a novel, get published, you're going to be reviewed on Amazon and other sites and, if you're lucky, professionals and a lot of them are going to eviscerate the baby you gave birth to. Even before you get to that point, you're going to have to deal with an editor who really just thinks that plot twist involving monkeys or spaceships or cactus liquor is just moronic and you'd better change it because it soured the last 1/3 of the book. Or they hate this character or this scene or that scene is told from the wrong POV or whatever. Editing, by its fundamental nature is criticism. If it's self-editing, it's you criticizing your own work. If it's a friend or family member or professional, it's criticism. So, the point here, to be succinct, is everyone doesn't get the gold trophy like they have since teeball. And if you can't handle the red ink, you'll never produce something coherent. And that's fine if you're here just to write. But that doesn't mean you should get to tell everyone who wants to be critical and express an opinion in a completely separate forum that their opinions aren't valid or welcome here. I hung around on the Fantasy boards for the first week of Nano, until I realized that they were populated with people who had no idea what they were doing and were asking for things that were so completely fundamental, in my opinion, to the writing of a novel, that they clearly didn't even know what they were writing. Instead of hanging around and trolling, I simply left after becoming tired of it. You people are, obviously, welcome to do the same with this thread.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:13:04 +0700

Man, I am busy for a day and you guys post the holy bejeezus out of this thread.... Writing can be fun and serious. For me, it's both, and it has to be. When nano starts up, I'm serious about getting down to task and putting the story in my mind's eye onto paper. There are struggles with my internal dialogue and direction, but putting it down on paper is where the rubber meets the road. The fun part is the journey itself, the wittiness of your dialogue, the cleverness of your plot, the interest of the story arc. Sitting back after 30 days and thinking 'God, I wrote that? It needs work, but I think I hammered something out of raw material'. With practice by doing nano, I am deliberate and disciplined. Unfortunately, this is not the nano standard. Take a look at the statistics page. 14%, which by percentage is lower than the last 4 years (2010 being the highest at 19.1%, 2007 clocking in at 15.1%). If committing to reaching 50,000 words and having fun is the goal of nano, it looks like only one of those two was met. Assuredly there are a variety of reasons - intentions when you hear about nano, sign up, and completely forget it for the next shiny thing you saw on the internet, busy holiday season, unexpected life events (death, injury, severe illness, etc.), and the last likely culprit - laziness (or the lack of the it's antithesis - diligence). Maybe your story sucks and it brings about lethargy and tooling around the fora and internet for other things to do. Maybe it doesn't suck, but you just can't get your butt in the chair to write. No amount of fun will fix that. Writing really is work, but if you can't find enough seriousness to sit down to start typing, you'll never find the REAL fun in nano - writing your own story. Let's not mistake the fun of 50,000 words vs. the fun of discovering you had a story inside you. That's the debate, in my estimation, and the point of the POC: we don't believe in 50,000 words of fun. We believe in 50,000 words of story. The fun is integral to that, even though it doesn't feel that way. It feels like work, but rewarding, satisfying work. If we can push past 50,000 words of story because we found that the story demanded more words, great. The story and only the story should matter in nano. Make no mistake: the 88% failure rate in nano is because people cannot write their story, let alone 50,000 words of it. They've been knocked out of the challenge before they start or they never took their STORY seriously enough to want to write it. The overachievers? That they have a quality story is a debate, but no one disagrees that they hit 50,000 words or 50,000 words of story. They are the 12% winners with hyperdrive strapped to their backs enough to probably push up the entire participant average wordcount up 1,000 by effort alone. They have, I think, met both definitions of nano fun - they had fun of hitting 50,000 in the first day and kept hammering away at a story that entertained them. I don't think the rah rah rah 50,000 is quite working the way it used to. For once, I'd like to see the success rate hit 25%, even if you write 50,000 words on the nose and there is absolutely no story left to write. Did your story stop short at 31,000 words? Write a second story of 19,000 words. Everyone has at least five ideas in their mind at one time. If you don't believe me, go count the number of 'which story do I write' threads. Critical writing skills are important, but that's really an education matter (along with critical thinking skills, which are sorely lacking at all levels of society). Being critical of writing is normal. If you haven't read a novel and thought 'this is story is terrible/boring/cliche' or, better yet 'I can write a better story than this', you have at least consciously found a critical flaw in the writing that you yourself can solve or improve. It might be the ninja or shovel or plot bunny someone threw in there.... As I've said before, I'm pretty impressed with this small POC group. Far above average in achievement and I think each one can say their story was both work and fun.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

annabelle2024 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 02:16:36 +0700

Okay, on to a new subject. Who has started revisions? Are you looking forward to it, or does the thought make your brain bleed? Me personally, I'm letting the love affair cool down before I start hacking away at my story. I can probably use about half of what I wrote during November. Some scenes don't work for my story anymore and I know I'll have to cut them, but that's okay. I do plan to edit and edit again. Now where did I put my red pen?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:48:13 +0700

I need to finish Part One first! I'm a couple of scenes short when I hit my 50k and ran out of steam. My co-writer husband has begun editing. I've sat down to write since NaNo ended, but only ended up importing everything in Scriverner and playing around with that. Took longer than expected. But I'm done with that, so tonight.....

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 02:23:04 +0700

Rant time! I'm not a Christmas fan. It's not like I'm opposed to the holiday, but just that by the time Dec 25 rolls around, I'm pretty much sick of the whole thing. One thing I do love is the abundance of specialty food this time of year. At the same time I want to stay fairly slim, so I pick and choose and practice moderation with these special foods. When I found out Starbucks had a sugar-free non-fat peppermint mocha, I was very excited. (Review: Yummy, but not as good as the real thing.) I had to run some errands today, and it's pretty blustery and cold, so I decided to treat myself. I approach the door and spy the special Christmas decorations with the tagline "Let's Merry!" Aren't we missing a verb in there somewhere? Was "be" really too expensive? Too long to fit on the door? Please tell me there was some reason why you tried to make an adjective into a verb? Or maybe this was a proposition and they just mispelled it? If so, then Starbucks! Please! Let's just keep it at coffee, okay? Grrrrrr.... I was pissed off. But cynic that I am, I just figured they were trying to make the masses feel more at home by not using proper grammar. And I still wanted a mocha, so I ignored it.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:59:19 +0700

I left and am, in fact, still gone, but I've had a lot of wine tonight and the G+ folks told me there were more posts, so. Seriously? Bitching about editing? That's what the PoC have descended to? Writing is editing. Anyone can spew out a bunch of shit in the page; a writer takes that raw ore and smelts it, shapes it, and polishes it into something beautiful. Your first draft sucks. I don't care who you are and I don't care if I'm banned for saying it (and no, DC, I got something out of my own determination; nano was an excuse--at best I got something out of this thread, so thanks for that). It sucks. Editing is where it's at. It's what divides the men from the boys. The pussies from the hard-ass men. The writers from the people fucking around with a keyboard. You don't want to edit? I don't blame you. Now do it anyway or else admit that you're just masturbating with a 102 keys. But that's just me, bringing the juice. MBP out.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 17:09:47 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] I left and am, in fact, still gone, but I've had a lot of wine tonight and the G+ folks told me there were more posts, so. Seriously? Bitching about editing? That's what the PoC have descended to? [/quote] I don't think it was POC regulars complaining about editing. [quote=MrBadgerPants] Writing is editing. Anyone can spew out a bunch of shit in the page; a writer takes that raw ore and smelts it, shapes it, and polishes it into something beautiful. Your first draft sucks. I don't care who you are and I don't care if I'm banned for saying it (and no, DC, I got something out of my own determination; nano was an excuse--at best I got something out of this thread, so thanks for that). It sucks.[/quote] I think just about all of the nano winners will agree. [quote=MrBadgerPants] Editing is where it's at. It's what divides the men from the boys. The pussies from the hard-ass men. The writers from the people fucking around with a keyboard. You don't want to edit? I don't blame you. Now do it anyway or else admit that you're just masturbating with a 102 keys. [/quote] Editing is as much work as the initial rough draft. Often times you have to rewrite whole chapters to get the tempo, style and dialogue right. So, yes, it is work. To OLL's credit, they have a forum that is dedicated to the other 11 months of the year for this endeavour. Usually it's where the remainder of the 14% hang out to wring hands in angst as they work through the rough draft. Me? I'm sitting this month out to recharge, catch up on other things left by the wayside so I can tackle First Draft in January. That is the next real challenge for me post-nano. We'll see how it goes.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

CaveWoman — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 02:07:10 +0700

I really wish I hadn't been so busy trying to create my writing habit in November that I missed this thread. It's a damn sight more fun that the rest of the forums.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:54:41 +0700

It sure has been, CaveWoman, except for the odd off-the-wall thing here and there. I'll be checking back into NaNo over the next little while to communicate with some locals, still not certain I'll be back next November after the startling events here, got the Aspie portion of my brain reeling, but I wish for everyone, you know, a year that doesnt suck or anything. Maybe some good stuff, too. ;-)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:59:12 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] Suggestions? Further rants? [/quote] I'd rant about people who feel the need to justify locking a thread, but that would just lock another thread. Also, they might get an emotional owie on the internet. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:11:52 +0700

I actually created a free message board on some free message board site while procrastinating prior to putting up my dog for the night and so forth, but it sucked and was a pain in the ass to use so... google+ go! For great justice! And cynicism!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 17:14:44 +0700

[quote=Darbrashelle] Alright if you google+ this is it: https://plus.google.com/110123525617930153819 [/quote] Cool, I'll link up to this when I get back to my CLU.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:09:06 +0700

Alright linked, but no way to post...?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:06:34 +0700

Nah, I'm not mad at them. We were being critical and questioning but we stayed in our thread. But I guess it was too much for them to read instead of ignore (which is their own advice).

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

rosymamacita — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 21:28:45 +0700

I'm ok with what they did. I'm antisocial and grumpy, but I'm not really cool with picking on people, so...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

LittleMissZilla — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:59:39 +0700

On the one hand, I completely understand how ugly flame wars can break out on threads in the blink of an eye and I respect taking a hard line to prevent them. I mean, I get it but I can't say the reasoning in this particular case makes all that much sense to me. I'll leave it there lest I say something that gets this locked up again.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

LittleMissZilla — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:55:49 +0700

I ditched Google+ about a month ago but I joined again. I found the page but yeah, it doesn't do anything. I'm not sure Google+ provides that many tools for groups, except for their 'hangout' feature and I think that requires webcams (which I don't have). I know Facebook blows but they do have better group capability (wall, discussion area for threads, chat, etc.)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:22:44 +0700

[quote=Scratchingcat] Somehow I expected Bruce Willis, Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons to show up in here. [/quote] Don't forget Samuel L. Jackson!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 00:32:02 +0700

I was hoping to lure them in but it appears that, sadly, my clever ruse has failed. Also: Get these motherfucking snakes off my motherfucking thread.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:04:51 +0700

Not recently, but in the last several years, yeah. I picked up the 4-pack set (because, dammit, I enjoyed the new one, even for all that was screwed up about it; it's maybe not Die Hard 1-3, but it's still a decent brain-dead action movie... kind of like my feelings re: the new Indiana Jones) and have been meaning to go back and watch the whole trilogy. Maybe I'll do that if I finish my rough draft this weekend. I can open up that new bottle of Hendricks I got for my b-day and have a drink whenever Willis says "Yippiekaiay" and/or "Motherfucker".

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:27:56 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] Maybe I'll do that if I finish my rough draft this weekend. I can open up that new bottle of Hendricks I got for my b-day and have a drink whenever Willis says "Yippiekaiay" and/or "Motherfucker". [/quote] I enjoyed the last one as well. Bruce had a lot of snarky lines and Justin Long added quite a bit. Can't say the villain was very memorable, though. Alan Rickman and Jeremy Irons were much better. You should drink every time Bruce talks to himself.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:31:31 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] Not recently, but in the last several years, yeah. I picked up the 4-pack set (because, dammit, I enjoyed the new one, even for all that was screwed up about it; it's maybe not Die Hard 1-3, but it's still a decent brain-dead action movie... [/quote] I hate to break it to you, but your 4-pack is going to be missing a 5th. 'A Good Day to Die Hard' coming in 2013. Also with Bruce Willis. Hey that sounds like a good name for the very last day of nano to me.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:58:59 +0700

I vote for future noir. Something akin to this: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/6/12 would be a novel I would be happy to read. And fantasy takes research if you do it right. I've learned how to pick various types of locks, a variety of facts about 20th century technological development, that syphilis is far more likely to leave permanent physical damage to a molested child than the actual molestation, how to make gin and brandy, and the rough daily death rate for 1910 Manhattan in the event that it had been struck by plague and I'm already so full of trivia I sneeze facts.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

CarrieClothwright — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:21:48 +0700

ack! I lovelovelove old radio mystery shows. Sometimes it seems to me that the 40's were a kind of golden age of good dialogue--intelligent, fast-paced, subtle, and sometimes hilarious. In many movies too. In print I still think Rex Stout has some of the best language. If I weren't past Archie's age cut-off I might have a serious crush.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

CarrieClothwright — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:22:51 +0700

oh yeah, and I forgot to mention, I really like your idea #2.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 20:27:33 +0700

I don't know if I'll do another NaNo. If I do, I'll do Part Two of this book. This year was the first year I won, and I'm not ashamed to say I struggled to get to 50k even with a co-writer. I work a long day, I have a long commute, at some point I still need to eat, do laundry, do dishes, etc. Doesn't leave much time for writing. In November this year, I did pretty much nothing but work, sleep, basic chores, and write. Fun in it's own way, but very difficult.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:30:46 +0700

Yes, but how will I ever get to 1 million words?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:05:54 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] I vote for future noir. Something akin to this: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/6/12 would be a novel I would be happy to read.[/quote] When I started thinking about the idea, this comic showed up. It nailed the look and feel, though robot discrimination wasn't in my idea. I think I tried it out with a very short story. Not sure where I put it.... So I let it sit and maybe I'll be prodded enough about how it's a good idea to write.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:17:28 +0700

About fantasy and research: I've heard that fantasy can take both research and a ridiculous amount of detail, but I'm not sure I wholly agree with that. Clear and concise detail? Absolutely! A whole lot of research? Not unless you want things to look very specific to the middle ages. For instance, "The Onion Girl" by Charles de Lindt is clearly fantasy, but it doesn't have much to do with the Middle Ages. There's fairies and dream-wolves and such, but for the most part, it's really its own thing. Same with Stephen King's "Dark Tower" series. I would describe those books as Dark/Western fantasy with science fiction elements. Or just take "The Neverending Story" by Michael Ende. (The book, not necessarily the movie.) There's so much in there, and only a very small proportion even mentions anything akin to the middle ages. I think a lot of folks have mistaken "fantasy" as *only* meaning LOTR-esque or D&D-like, but it's really so very, VERY much broader than that. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:44:32 +0700

In my head, Archie and I are always the perfect age for each other, and he's just a wee bit less shallow once he moves past 40...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:20:41 +0700

[quote=CarrieClothwright] oh yeah, and I forgot to mention, I really like your idea #2. [/quote] Thanks. I kind of like it, too. Throwing back culture at the same time throwing it forward. It would be an interesting mix.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:20:14 +0700

Just keep plugging away. :) Though I vote for simply writing the story, and letting it be however much it happens to end up being. To give you some idea, Stephen King's "It" is 5,000,542,341 words long. :) (from WikiAnswers.)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:06:21 +0700

Fun conversation on Google+ going on right now, actually. I like the "real time" aspect of it.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:06:38 +0700

I've added you to the page. You should be able to see our thread now.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

LittleMissZilla — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:33:22 +0700

I *think* I see it. I'll keep fiddling around with it. Also, right after I added the pissed off cynics, Google+ recommended I add the Dalai Lama. Because he's the most pissed off cynic of us all?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:39:50 +0700

lmao.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 03:50:01 +0700

The internet is full of white knights, typically in inverse proportionality to the degree with which said knights identify with their peers. Nano is full of teens and young adults of a more introspective or socially-ostracized bent, so if you make one of them feel threatened they tend to dog-pile in order to keep this community of relatively like-minded introverts and extroverted-but-not-in-the-majority-grouping folk as accepting as they feel like it ought to be. Which isn't really fair, since it creates an environment where questioning anything is perceived as an attack and everyone is hyper-vigilant about not stepping on anyone's toes.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 14:26:42 +0700

[quote=Anahlynn] I'm no where near the age of 30, but I'm a pissed off cynic, so I hope I can hang around here. I've decided hanging around the All-Ages-Coffeehouse is a bad idea since none of them can handle being questioned. I questioned someone about the real reasons why her boyfriend broke up with her and the next thing I know, five different people are accusing me of being insensitive and an ass. All because I tried to work this out from the boyfriends point of you. I hate my age group. Does anyone else experience this kind of group attack just for stating your opinion? [/quote] Actually, as far as cynics go, we don't really question people's relationships. And really, that stuff belongs in diaries, blogs or FB for all the world to read. I'd say we're more writing oriented, except when MLs make stuff up and you're allowed to ignore cheaters, but not threads critical of writing. Hating an age group really isn't a reason to be a cynic. That's more emotionally driven. Now if you believe people are motivated by self interest rather than group think (i.e. you don't believe everyone is 'special'), you're probably closer to the mark. Why don't you make a cynic group within all ages? You'll find out how many cynics you have in your own age group. You might be surprised.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 05:01:49 +0700

double plus one

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 06:31:56 +0700

So true. I often have foot-in-mouth syndrome and I can come across unsympathetic. I'm willing to admit that. When people start leaving me rude messages is when I turn viscious. Don't corner me and I won't attack.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 05:36:20 +0700

Hm, I agree with you completely, though I think you have to make sure you aren't slandering their writing abilities. Just because you yourself cannot write one million + words of at least half decent quality does not mean others can't. It depends on how much free time you have and how fast you type. I for one, cannot. It takes me forever to type anything. It's sad how the professional world views NaNo as nothing more than a game for amateurs. I think if you have to resort to flying chicken, aliens, ninjas, and fourt-wall breaking just to reach 50K, you should do the Young Writer's Program and set up a reasonable goal for yourself.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:38:55 +0700

Let's just not go there. Save it for off-site.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

TheGildedFox — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 09:09:50 +0700

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 09:13:37 +0700

I think that professionals in the publishing industry look at NaNo as amateur hour because...well, it is. If you were a published author -- even a really slow-writing published author like Ms. Neffineger who wrote the week-5 pep talk thing -- you wouldn't need nano. You'd have an agent asking you for new books and a publisher providing deadlines. Authors probably don't look down on the event as hard as the rest of the industry. I mean, if anyone is going to understand the problems of starting a writing habit or getting motivated it's going to be someone who went through the journey from blank page to a printed novel in their hand. Editors and agents, on the other hand, already have slush piles thicker than is useful. Here we have 3 billion words of amateur writer output. If even 1% of those words make it to a publisher's or agent's inbox, that's 30 million more words they'll have to wade through this year. If we assume that Sturgeon's law is accurate, that's 29.7 million words of dreck to wade through (note to mods: I'm not saying any particular person's work is dreck, just that Theodore Sturgeon postulated that 99% of All work is dreck) in order to find roughly 3 novels that are worth publishing. If I were in publishing I'd hate nano, too.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:36:30 +0700

[quote=Anahlynn] Just because you yourself cannot write one million + words of at least half decent quality does not mean others can't. It depends on how much free time you have and how fast you type. I for one, cannot. It takes me forever to type anything. [/quote] I'll say it. You can't write 1M words in 30 days of 'half decent quality'. You'll have to define your metric for quality, but 1M in quantity does not translate. Perhaps, as TGF said, you have no job or obligations, but still, I think even professional writers would struggle to write 1M words in a month, let along 1M words worth saving from editing. We're cynical about the quality of the work by words/day. [quote=Anahlynn] It's sad how the professional world views NaNo as nothing more than a game for amateurs. I think if you have to resort to flying chicken, aliens, ninjas, and fourt-wall breaking just to reach 50K, you should do the Young Writer's Program and set up a reasonable goal for yourself. [/quote] You assume incorrectly. You're assuming that people resorting to all these stupid writing antics are young writers. They're not. They should be working on story structure and pacing, possibly getting up to 50k of solid writing, not writing in ninjas that have no place in their story just to make word count. Heck even a scene rewrite (that is, write the same since in a different way) is preferable than putting in something you're just going to cut out later. Even if they don't make it to 50k they shouldn't feel a failure if they've got all the structure and ideas they worked out themselves on paper. Nano encourages word count padding. Fine, but you can certainly QA that stuff out in edit, but whole scenes with ninjas are just a waste of your creative resources.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:36:07 +0700

Well said

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

rosymamacita — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 22:22:13 +0700

I agree with you that it's about having different goals. I have my goals and that is what I am setting out to meet. And they have theirs. I have no problem with that. They can write one million words and that doesn't take anything away from my 50k, or anyone else's. I don't even care if they wrote "what?" one million times. It still takes nothing away from my 50k. We aren't competing against the other nanoers. We win nothing from this except gratification, a banner, and however many words we write. Neither do they. For me, nano is about meeting my own goals, beating my own reluctance to write, winning a writing routine, reaching the breakthrough that has been blocking me from writing my novel. For all that I'm not up for the rah rah's and the socializing and the plot ninjas, I don't care if other people enjoy that. I don't go on those threads because I don't enjoy that.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

CarrieClothwright — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 10:35:33 +0700

I think you and I may be thinking the same thing.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 13:11:57 +0700

If you have something to say, you can say it to my face, er...avatar.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

vNichols — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 10:17:07 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] I think that professionals in the publishing industry look at NaNo as amateur hour because...well, it is. [/quote] Yup.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Scratchingcat — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 10:37:49 +0700

Patrick Rothfuss did Nano this year and I think he lost. The other day he complained how behind he was. I thought he was a really great sport about it.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

TheGildedFox — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 12:33:47 +0700

I just disagree with the statement. I'd go into detail but that's the kind of thing that got the original thread locked...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 05:10:52 +0700

That's why I can't understand a charge of "jealousy." I met my goal. And I'll tread dangerously and say I think it's rather closer to the spirit of NaNoWriMo than...not. Lest another visitor pop up from under a bridge to make noise, I'll leave it there. Other people may create their own challenges; I wave a wand and give them permission. I am a little upset that I am not allowed to even broach the notion that this is something to ponder over with like minds. I suppose it does make sense to ignore people who appear to seek attention by waxing on about what appear to be mendacious points of light, but then, a specious claim is always a pretty one, and holds some certain attraction, like moths to a flameless led candle. Just because I prefer old-fashioned candles does not mean I make judgments on the lack of warmth produced by that light. It is merely a curiosity.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

vNichols — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 05:18:55 +0700

I hadn't even considered that. I do sort of doubt that they actually do any editing, though. Some people just do NaNo for fun.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 13:52:26 +0700

[quote=zenken] I'll say it. You can't write 1M words in 30 days of 'half decent quality'. You'll have to define your metric for quality, but 1M in quantity does not translate. Perhaps, as TGF said, you have no job or obligations, but still, I think even professional writers would struggle to write 1M words in a month, let along 1M words worth saving from editing. We're cynical about the quality of the work by words/day. [/quote] ...You also can't learn Icelandic in a week, but Daniel Tammet proved the world wrong. What's your point? [quote=zenken] You assume incorrectly. You're assuming that people resorting to all these stupid writing antics are young writers. They're not. They should be working on story structure and pacing, possibly getting up to 50k of solid writing, not writing in ninjas that have no place in their story just to make word count. Heck even a scene rewrite (that is, write the same since in a different way) is preferable than putting in something you're just going to cut out later. Even if they don't make it to 50k they shouldn't feel a failure if they've got all the structure and ideas they worked out themselves on paper. Nano encourages word count padding. Fine, but you can certainly QA that stuff out in edit, but whole scenes with ninjas are just a waste of your creative resources. [/quote] I never assumed that they were young writers. I just said if you're going to do insane things to boost your word count you should check out the Young Writer's Program and set a nice goal for yourself until you're comfortable with the idea of 50K. I don't think of a young writer as someone who is young physically, but someone who is young in their writing and hasn't really found their voice. I think if you're fifty and you need to use the YWP then more power to you.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 20:24:22 +0700

As a NaNo rebel, my opinion of it has been that it is a self-challenge. There's no buy-in, the only thing close to a monetary reward are things like the Scrivener discount, and competition is what you make of it. Even the whole validation is on the honor system with the luddite clause. So I see no issue with changing the rules as you go or starting out with different rules. The point of this exercise is to write. For amateurs (and I agree that this is in many ways amateur hour), it is very useful for kick-starting that story that you've been meaning to write "someday", and for establishing good writing habits. It's not about feeling better as much as setting goals that you can do to achieve what you are trying to achieve.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:09:42 +0700

[quote=Anahlynn] ...You also can't learn Icelandic in a week, but Daniel Tammet proved the world wrong. What's your point? [/quote] So your answer in opposition that one cannot write 1M words in 30 days of 'half decent' quality is to point to a fairly rare person with autism [more specifically savant syndrome]? That's not counterfactual evidence or argument - that's an outlier. I surmise that you're implying there are outliers among the 100k+ nano participants that not only can write 1M words a day, but write better than 'half decent' or even of superb quality prose. Contrary to shiny happy nano, we're not all special outliers, and statistically, I don't think your outlier is supported by percentages. You'll need to do better than that to convince me. [quote=Anahlynn] I never assumed that they were young writers. I just said if you're going to do insane things to boost your word count you should check out the Young Writer's Program and set a nice goal for yourself until you're comfortable with the idea of 50K. I don't think of a young writer as someone who is young physically, but someone who is young in their writing and hasn't really found their voice. I think if you're fifty and you need to use the YWP then more power to you. [/quote] In this, I think we agree. If you cannot achieve 50,000 words of your very own story, then you should dial backward and start with something smaller, more concrete to find not only your voice, but how to write a single story arc without much subplot or subtext.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 05:31:51 +0700

This is the first year I have a serious plan to do that. Some rewriting, even. Before, it was purely for the pleasure of writing a story. Well, and the excruciating effort of that, since I'm not really a storyteller in the novel sense. This year, I find I want to actually work on the thing, give it more body and shape. I'm slow, I guess, and time is not a rigid construct, outside of November.

Re: Moderator Note

Mnemonicer — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 16:32:34 +0700

Dragonchilde, I respectfully question where the abusiveness comes into this thread, as you seem to be indicating. I'm not certain I see anything that qualifies as abuse here. It's a genuine debate regarding the goals of Nano and how people view them. Some people see the goal as simply producing 50k words, which I think anyone can do in the space of a couple afternoons simply hacking at the keys unconsciously, and producing 50k good words, which is a much more difficult proposition. There are all types who enjoy participating in Nano and, absent anything that rises to anything close to cyberbullying, I question the sensitivity of both the reception of the comments in question and enforcement of the Terms of Service. Beyond that, no one here is being abusive in any traditional fashion, nor are they pointing or namecalling any particular individual by name and/or on this thread. No one is stalking any individual on the nano forums and slinging harmful names/accusations/insults at anyone. I personally think writing takes more than just blind acceptance to produce something of quality; every writer knows that red ink is necessary to the creation of a work and many writers accept it. In fact, I tell my readers and mentors to "Make it bleed." I find it highly questionable that there is any abuse and/or violations of the terms of service here and politely request you explain Nano and your standards more thoroughly so that we can be compliant in the future and/or take our discussions elsewhere.

Re: Moderator Note

bibliosylph — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:28:06 +0700

I just want to concur with every single word in Mnemonicer's reply. I'm disappointed and actually slightly shocked that this is being made an issue.

Re: Moderator Note

chinalizard — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:42:51 +0700

I think she's referring to why the previous Cynic thread was closed. What's more, I agree with Dragonchilde that there seems to be an overly-judgmental feel to this whole thread. Perhaps not explicitly by pointing out specific people and outright calling them names, but the over-all tone definitely seems to drift into a rather judgmental direction. To be honest, this debate doesn't seem to be about how people personally view NaNo. Rather, it seems to be a debate on who is and who is not a "real" writer. The indication that I've gotten from this thread is that most folks here feel that if a person isn't writing for srs (i. e., to become published), then they shouldn't even bother writing at all. I know that folks here probably didn't *intend* for that to be the tone....but that *is* how things are coming across. :/ And personally, I don't agree with that sentiment, partially due to my own experiences in writing. I *just* became really serious about my writing in the past year or so....but that was after several years of just writing mostly incoherent drivel just for the heck of it! Thing is, if I hadn't written just for fun, then I'd have no idea that this is something I'd actually want to look into pursuing as a serious thing. Anyways, I think everyone here could do with a chill pill. If you're a published author, then great! If not, then that's wonderful too! Keep practicing and having fun! There's no writer's guild that is going to descend with an elite army of ninja monkey-men to ban you from all keyboards for writing.

Re: Moderator Note

Lyria2 — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:51:05 +0700

If the moderator says so, then it is. That's why they have moderators. Best just to drop the subject.

Re: Moderator Note

Dragonchilde — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:08:53 +0700

[quote=Mnemonicer] Dragonchilde, I respectfully question where the abusiveness comes into this thread, as you seem to be indicating. I'm not certain I see anything that qualifies as abuse here. It's a genuine debate regarding the goals of Nano and how people view them. Some people see the goal as simply producing 50k words, which I think anyone can do in the space of a couple afternoons simply hacking at the keys unconsciously, and producing 50k good words, which is a much more difficult proposition. There are all types who enjoy participating in Nano and, absent anything that rises to anything close to cyberbullying, I question the sensitivity of both the reception of the comments in question and enforcement of the Terms of Service. [/quote] At this point, no additional violations have taken place. This is a warning, however, as the discussion that got the other thread shut down had resumed. That's why I said "if this thread ventures back" as opposed to "this thread has ventured back and will be shut down." If a violation had taken place, I would have shut down the thread. Cyberbullying is not the sole extent of our Terms and Conditions. We expect those here to treat everyone with respect, and that is part of our Codes of Conduct and Terms and Conditions. [quote]Beyond that, no one here is being abusive in any traditional fashion, nor are they pointing or namecalling any particular individual by name and/or on this thread. No one is stalking any individual on the nano forums and slinging harmful names/accusations/insults at anyone. [/quote] I am aware of that. That is why no posts were removed nor the thread shut down. [quote]I personally think writing takes more than just blind acceptance to produce something of quality; every writer knows that red ink is necessary to the creation of a work and many writers accept it. In fact, I tell my readers and mentors to "Make it bleed." I find it highly questionable that there is any abuse and/or violations of the terms of service here and politely request you explain Nano and your standards more thoroughly so that we can be compliant in the future and/or take our discussions elsewhere. [/quote] The standards are clear in the Terms and Conditions and Codes of Conduct you agreed to when signing up for this site. As I said previously, this was a warning... not a reprimand. Some of the discussion was turning back towards other participants, and this is a warning to all of you that if it continues in that direction, the thread will likely get shut down.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

cosmam — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:56:42 +0700

[quote=chinalizard] To give you some idea, Stephen King's "It" is 5,000,542,341 words long. :) (from WikiAnswers.) [/quote] I think WikiAnswers might have been pulling your chain, or you had a typo ;-). The most reliable count that I can found is from amazon: 436,809 words. I know that the Dark Tower series, which you have referenced, comes out at about 1.3 million words, not counting the eighth book that comes out next year.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:55:40 +0700

[quote=chinalizard]I don't see the point in being uber-srs about NaNo to the point that you stop having fun and start judging others. [/quote] Okay. But if that's the case, then you have to admit that naysayers like Laura Miller and other pro scribes have a very good point when they paint all Wrimos as shit nozzles. While people are actively encouraging those with obvious mental issues to write hundreds of thousands of words of nothing but garbage, you're dismissing the very notion that we should be learning something from this exercise as some sort of snobbery. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:01:29 +0700

None of that actually addressed the legitimate issue that the publishing industry has with nano producing an outpouring of 50,000 word rough-draft manuscripts showing up in their mailboxes. I wasn't saying that there's anything wrong with nano or that there are any particular reasons for doing nano and I certainly didn't try to start up a No True Scotsman spiral about what it means to be a REAL whatever. Someone asked why professional authors, agents, and publishers look down on nano as 'amateur hour'. It Is amateur hour, pretty much by its definition, the occasional professional who takes part to show solidarity with and encouragement for new writers not withstanding. Beyond that, the publishing industry has valid reason to not be super-excited about it. I'm well aware that most of the work done for nano will never go anywhere near a publisher, and that many of the participants are perfectly happy with that outcome and never intended to publish in the first place. That's why I said "if even 1% of those words..." rather than saying "if all of those words" or similar. It's documented fact that publishers' and agents' slush piles grow more in December and January than the rest of the year, thanks to nano. From the outside, that looks like a good thing. More potential new novelists. But publishers are already inundated with more manuscripts than they can actually afford the man-hours to read, so while you can just dismiss the added burden of more submissions as "that's their job; deal with it", the statistically-certain craptacularity of most of those manuscripts (note: not poking fun at anyone in particular, or even saying that the manuscripts generated by nano are the crappy ones, just that most submissions aren't going to pass muster and nano increases the volume) presents an additional hurdle for writers whose work *is* good enough for publication. They have to actually get their work read by someone, which is harder when they're one voice among thousands instead of one voice among tens or hundreds. As for "nano is for having fun and nothing else!": There are a lot of ways to have fun. You can write anytime you want for fun. Nano is about getting up the gumption to finally write that novel you've been thinking about writing for years but never taken the time and energy to put on the page. If it were fun or easy then nano wouldn't need to exist. Exciting, yes, and once you really get rolling it can be fun, but it's not a leisure activity like, I don't know, National Eat A Lot Of Cookies Month (I wish that were real). The folks in here aren't complaining because they want to feel better than other people. They're complaining because they came to nano to do something significant - to write a book, or at least get a really solid start on writing a book. Maybe they want to publish, maybe they want to self-publish, maybe they want to show it to friends and family, maybe they want to stick it on a shelf and admire it, maybe they deleted the document on Dec 1 and are just happy to know that they Did It. It doesn't matter why you want to do it or what you get out of it; the point is that you came to this event to accomplish something. If people want to come just to 'have fun' or have pissing matches over word count then fine, that's their bag, it doesn't take any skin off my nose. But if the event starts to cater to those people instead of the people actually trying to accomplish something significant in their lives, then it starts to alienate the people who are here for more enriching reasons than they needed something to occupy their attention for a few weeks. And while you may not care, and nobody else may care, if even One person turns away from nano because of the perceived dominant attitude on the site and doesn't do something they could have done that would have made them feel accomplished, successful, and like a better person? Then I think nano has failed.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

TheGildedFox — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:37:21 +0700

[quote=chinalizard] Third, I think we're approaching the "You're not a REAL ____ if you don't ____!" thresh-hold. If I write a poem just for my husband for our anniversary, then I'm being a writer. If a 13-year-old writes raunchy Naruto fan-fiction, then they are being a writer. [/quote] Is there something inherently wrong with this though? I think that the wonderful thing about the original PoC thread (before it got into the dangerous territory of calling individuals out by name, which was poor judgement) is that it was another way to find like-minded writers that had similar goals. I mean. the name of @#$^^&$# thread was Pissed...Off...Cynics. I don't think it gets much clearer than that. The idea of posting in this thread to "Take a Chill Pill" is extremely laughable. It was a place for cynical (and often, older) writers to come and have a bit of a laugh and a grin about things we had in common. One of those things is that most of us had a very different set of goals than the majority of Nano'ers. I still think the word count topic is a valid discussion, as long as we are able to follow the rules and not call people out by name or username.

Re: Moderator Note

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:12:36 +0700

I'm not sure why it's okay to tell us that we need to relax and stop being so serious, but it's not okay for us to say that others should stop piddling around and do something real. I mean, this is a thread in the 30s & 40s forum titled "Pissed Off Cynics". People in their 30's and 40's can be reliably expected to be more focused on srsbzns, as it were, in any given area of their lives, and the title up there Says that folks in this thread are going to be jaded, cynical, and not overly happy. What did you expect to find?

Re: Moderator Note

TheGildedFox — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 15:25:16 +0700

[quote=chinalizard] I think she's referring to why the previous Cynic thread was closed. What's more, I agree with Dragonchilde that there seems to be an overly-judgmental feel to this whole thread. Perhaps not explicitly by pointing out specific people and outright calling them names, but the over-all tone definitely seems to drift into a rather judgmental direction. [/quote] So what you are saying, basically, is that this thread has taken a, I dunno, "cynical" direction, and that people are sounding, hmmm what's the phrase I'm looking for...pissed off? I give up.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

cosmam — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 23:27:03 +0700

[quote=Shem-the-Penman] While people are actively encouraging those with obvious mental issues to write hundreds of thousands of words of nothing but garbage [/quote] I am pretty sure it's things like that that Dragonchilde was trying to remind us to avoid this time around. I was going to take individual issue with all the false assumptions in that statement, but I'll just leave it alone. It's unnecessary to the discussion of how people use NaNo and the real world effects of this self-challenge (considering it's impossible to know if someone is writing nothing but garbage without reading what they are writing), and I think that discussing how people approach this has merit and should be discussed, non-judgmentally. Making blanket statements about mental illness or quality, however, is not needed.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:16:51 +0700

I can see what you're saying. I really can. However....if someone is 110% intent on publishing, I would say that NaNo isn't necessarily for them. Sure, they can do it...but they'll also be doing a TON of writing outside of NaNo. Every day of *every* month. Because they'll have a much more professional deadline to keep with their publishers. I agree that NaNo isn't always for professionals, but at the same time, I can see how it can help some folks become *more* professional by developing a "writing every day" format. I have yet to see where NaNo "alienates" anyone. If you want to write a book that gets published, then write a book and do your best to get published! NaNo in no way stops you from doing that. In fact, there's quite a few forums and threads on here discussing publishing, whether to self-publish or go to a publishing house, support threads for those who keep getting turned down (which is a fairly common thing even if your book is perfection. Unless you're Stephen King or something.) What's more, it's not like NaNo is the only site for writer's on the 'Net; last spring I discovered a site for writers called SheWrites.com. And in one of the other threads around the NaNo forums, someone asked for advice on other writing sites, which other NaNites were happy to post. IMHO, the NaNo forums and program have a lot more to offer than it is being given credit for here. Since browsing the forums this past month, I've found TONS of helpful information to both become a better, more knowledgeable writer myself, and to help others. I would suggest that if you feel down about the possible usefulness of NaNo, that you just go and browse around. Read what others have to say. Read their suggestions, their fears, their woes. Read about their excitement and personal triumphs. And also realize that no writer, save for the exceptionally gifted, is expected to produce a masterpiece the first time around....and that very few people actually feel that they do.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:18:08 +0700

An analogy: People run 10k's for all kinds of reasons. A lot of people go to numerous 10k's, have no trouble knocking out 10 kilometers at a go, and start doing things like dressing up in costumes or doing every other kilometer backwards or on a pogo stick or something. That's fine. They're not really 'challenged' by running 10k anymore and they're basically just there for the rush and the temporary community of folks pounding out ten klicks on the road. But for a lot of people running in any given 10k, this is their first race. They probably have wanted to do this for a while, are working hard to get through it, and will have a serious sense of accomplishment at the finish line, even if they have to walk some of the way. Now what if the 10k started to cater to the people who do it habitually, or just to have some fun? Everybody grab a balaclava and do 2k as a ninja! This kilometer, everybody run backwards! Okay, we're going to sprint for 300 meters! Go! Tons of fun for the folks who can do 10k with one foot behind their back; a giant pain in the ass and demotivating factor for the folks who are struggling to get through the race at all, and whether the crowds of people goofing off around them actually impacts those individual's personal race or not, it cuts into their Experience of the race. And if the event gets a reputation for being full of bullshit? People trying to do something serious for themselves are going to stop running. And then the race is just full of people in costumes.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:02:56 +0700

I'm with cosmam on this one.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:20:23 +0700

I'd also like to point out that many NaNites do go on to become published, by an actual publishing house! I know one such person personally. Her story started out as a NaNo novel, and is now fully published and available to the public. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:43:20 +0700

You're still not actually addressing my point. You're also contradicting yourself. "Nano isn't for people who want to be published." "If you want to do nano and get published, it's great for that!" Whichever way you'd like to have it, or both, it has nothing to do with my point. The only things you said that actually address my points are that you don't think nano alienates anyone and that there are threads about improving your writing, if that's what you want to do. Which is fine, except that I, and others in this thread, are straight-up telling you: nano is alienating us. So there you go; you have now seen nano alienated someone. Yes, there are threads about writing, about improving your writing, about taking writing and this event seriously. But there are far more threads about plot bunnies and bullshit. That isn't the organizers' fault, though: people are going to write threads about whatever they want. What Is the organizers' fault, though, is fostering the "it doesn't matter, just race to 50k, this isn't about improving your writing, just mash some buttons and have fun!" attitude. And you only need to look up this very thread a few posts to see a prominent forum moderator espousing that very attitude as the official stance of nano. That's the attitude that alienates folks who want to take this event seriously. Publishing or not publishing has nothing to do with it. The event is about writing a novel, for whatever personal reasons you may have. It bills itself as a serious challenge to do something that most people can't or don't. It invites, at first blush, people who are trying to do something serious and personally significant. And then they walk in the front door to find plot bunnies and exhortations never to use the backspace key. This isn't Type A Lot Month. If that's the kind of event that nanowrimo wants to be, then fine. They can be Type A Lot Month. But I don't want anything to do with that, and at least some other folks who take part in it don't either. And it's that attitude that makes professional writers look down on nano instead of looking at it and saying, "This is encouraging people and helping them through the difficult process *I* went through when I was first starting out; what a great thing." Some writers look past the BS to the folks who *are* taking it seriously, but enough of them don't that the predominant opinion is that professionals think nano is worth ignoring. And I suspect that the reason OLL fell 30% or so short of its fundraising goal is that one had is trying to start a serious community outreach and youth literacy movement while the other hand is running the Wordcount Olympics. With any luck I'll be published, or on the way to publication, by next November and, as you said, I'll have professional obligations and deadlines to meet that mean I have no need of nano's offered excuse to spend my November evenings behind a word processor. But if I'm not? I don't think I'll be back here. If the changes in leadership that OLL is undergoing put a more serious spin back on nano then maybe, but I don't like the direction the event is headed in anymore.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

cosmam — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:36:44 +0700

I see what you're getting at, and agree that NaNo as a whole shouldn't cater to the zany challenges. Personally, I don't do them. This year, I did next to no sprinting, and had zero dares thrown at me (which I guess I mean I completed all of them?), but I can see how it could be helpful, not for writing seriously but just for writing. To continue (and perhaps abuse) your analogy, the thought behind the costumes isn't to further challenge those to whom a 10k isn't a big deal, but to lure in those that aren't sure whether or not they could run a 10k. It's a lot of miles, after all, but when they get in it and get to dress up as a ninja, or ride a pogo stick, they actually complete the 10k they didn't think they could. Then, the next year, they sign up whether or not they dress up for it. Is that true for everyone? Far from; a lot of people only write this month, and just do the silly stuff. There are probably some people who do this just for the competition, to get the highest word count possible (though from what I know of the "overachievers", they take it even more as a self-challenge, and are under no illusions about the seriousness or not of their writing, but YMMV). I do think there are people that get drawn in, that learn they love to write and can write a novel, and then stick with it more seriously. I'm curious about where you're seeing this focus on the costumes. I'm not questioning it, by the way, or calling you out or denying it - I can be a bit oblivious about this NaNo experience even after five years, and I want to know what you're seeing that is off-putting. I think NaNo should be open and welcoming to all writers, including those who don't want to randomly inject a space dragon into their stories.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:01:10 +0700

Have you done a 10k? I've never met someone who wore a costume, or otherwise fooled around, on their first time out. It's a hard thing to do if you're just working up to it for the first time. Wearing lycra and a mask or riding a pogo stick make it exponentially more difficult. Anyway. I don't really care what people want to post on the forums and I certainly don't care what people want to do in their own work. As I said, it's not skin off my nose how you run your race, as it were. But I see, increasingly, the pep talks and the nano organizer messages geared toward the "go! go! go! have fun! don't worry about what you're writing and just write more of it!" message. I mean, a pep talk was posted that a segment of the community misconstrued as recommending people focus on writing important things instead of wordcount-building minutiae and it got retracted. Mods are coming right out and saying, "this isn't about improving your writing, it's about having a good time". I see the costumes and the pogo sticks, but they've always been there, and I don't mind that people want to wear and ride them. They're not for me, but to each his own. But now I feel like the event staff are coming up to me and saying, "This is a costumes and pogo sticks event. I get that you're trying to run seriously, but keep that stuff to yourself because these dudes over here in the TMNT costumes are trying to get past you while carrying a tiki bar."

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Darbrashelle — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 01:36:41 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] With any luck I'll be published, or on the way to publication, by next November and, as you said, I'll have professional obligations and deadlines to meet that mean I have no need of nano's offered excuse to spend my November evenings behind a word processor. But if I'm not? I don't think I'll be back here. If the changes in leadership that OLL is undergoing put a more serious spin back on nano then maybe, but I don't like the direction the event is headed in anymore. [/quote] I am in wholehearted agreement. I've been wanting to participate in NaNo for years now, but this was the first time I was able to. The challenge itself was fine and I proved to myself that I could sit down and create a solid foundation for a story in a month's time. Learning that was liberating. However, I found little to inspire me in the forums. I came to my computer with a solid idea for a story. Ninjas, bunnies and other fluff not only not make any sense, they would ruin the tone of the story I was trying to create. No matter; I ignored the ongoing pep rally feel of the other forums like I ignored the mandatory fun in high school. Part of the reason I came to NaNoWriMo is the hope that I could find individuals who share the love of the written word and also share similar opinions and values about what constitutes a worthwhile endeavor. When I stumbled upon the POC thread, I actually laughed. Here, I thought, was a group of people who speak my language. It was a fantastic revelation, since I don't speak the language of the pep rally leaders who were just doing this "for fun." Maybe it's just me, but if I'm going to do something for fun, I want something to show for it. Particularly when the sacrifice was so difficult. In the last two weeks, my attitude regarding the experience has soured. Personally, I feel bullied and alienated for daring to take the experience seriously. I will continue writing, just as I did before this endeavor. However, I seriously doubt I will be back next year. And I know now that I am not alone in that opinion.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Dragonchilde — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:20:32 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] Yes, there are threads about writing, about improving your writing, about taking writing and this event seriously. But there are far more threads about plot bunnies and bullshit. That isn't the organizers' fault, though: people are going to write threads about whatever they want. What Is the organizers' fault, though, is fostering the "it doesn't matter, just race to 50k, this isn't about improving your writing, just mash some buttons and have fun!" attitude. And you only need to look up this very thread a few posts to see a prominent forum moderator espousing that very attitude as the official stance of nano. That's the attitude that alienates folks who want to take this event seriously. Publishing or not publishing has nothing to do with it. The event is about writing a novel, for whatever personal reasons you may have. It bills itself as a serious challenge to do something that most people can't or don't. It invites, at first blush, people who are trying to do something serious and personally significant. And then they walk in the front door to find plot bunnies and exhortations never to use the backspace key. This isn't Type A Lot Month.[/quote] This IS the official stance of NaNoWriMo. It always has been. A look in the archives will tell you that much. In fact, in the FAQs, it actually used to say as much. I quote: "Can anyone participate in NaNoWriMo? No. People who take their writing (and themselves) very seriously should probably go elsewhere. Everyone else, though, is warmly welcomed." That was eventually removed (for obvious reasons) but the primary purpose of NaNoWriMo is, in fact, to have fun. Not to promote Serious Writing Skills, not to launch careers, or even improve your writing skills. It's to write a novel. To get that someday novel written, to give you a deadline and motivation. No more, no less. Over the years, it has become more than that, of course, but at its heart, this is indeed the purpose. It's not about seriousness. Have you read Chris Baty's pep talks? They're never about being Serious Writers or The One True Way to Write. It's about challenging yourself and having fun while doing so. [quote]If that's the kind of event that nanowrimo wants to be, then fine. They can be Type A Lot Month. But I don't want anything to do with that, and at least some other folks who take part in it don't either. [/quote] I'm sorry you see it that way, but that's how NaNoWriMo has always been. It's been that way from the very beginning, when Chris Baty sent out that email to 20 odd friends of his and started something amazing. [quote]And it's that attitude that makes professional writers look down on nano instead of looking at it and saying, "This is encouraging people and helping them through the difficult process *I* went through when I was first starting out; what a great thing." Some writers look past the BS to the folks who *are* taking it seriously, but enough of them don't that the predominant opinion is that professionals think nano is worth ignoring. And I suspect that the reason OLL fell 30% or so short of its fundraising goal is that one had is trying to start a serious community outreach and youth literacy movement while the other hand is running the Wordcount Olympics.[/quote] This is the first year we've fallen short of our fundraising goals, and I suspect it's more about technical difficulties and the economy than the fact we have the YWP. Our community outreach and youth literacy programs have been running for several years; they've hardly started this year. [quote]With any luck I'll be published, or on the way to publication, by next November and, as you said, I'll have professional obligations and deadlines to meet that mean I have no need of nano's offered excuse to spend my November evenings behind a word processor. But if I'm not? I don't think I'll be back here. If the changes in leadership that OLL is undergoing put a more serious spin back on nano then maybe, but I don't like the direction the event is headed in anymore. [/quote] Given that there was never a serious spin on NaNoWriMo, I think it unlikely we'll be moving in that direction again. I'd say you got something out of the event, regardless. The challenge isn't for everyone; some people find it doesn't meet their needs. It seems you may be one of those people. And that's okay too. I leave you with this, a direct quote from Chris Baty from our own history: "The first year’s trials and tribulations are laid out in the introduction to No Plot? No Problem!, but the short version is that our novels, despite our questionable motives and pitiful experience, came out okay. Not great. But not horrible, either. And, more surprising than that, the writing process had been really, really fun. Fun was something we hadn’t expected. Pain? Sure. Embarrassment? Yes. Crippling self-doubt followed by a quiet distancing of ourselves from the entire project? You bet. But fun? Fun was a revelation. Novel-writing, we had discovered, was just like watching TV. You get a bunch of friends together, load up on caffeine and junk food, and stare at a glowing screen for a couple hours. And a story spins itself out in front of you. I think the scene—full of smack-talk and muffin crumbs on our keyboards—would have rightly horrified professional writers. We had taken the cloistered, agonized novel-writing process and transformed it into something that was half literary marathon and half block party." I think that says more about who we are and what we're about than I ever could.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:47:31 +0700

I still just ignore it, much like I ignore loud, uncomfortable observations by strangers in parking lots. (I dyed my hair recently, and one over-enthusiastic football fan shouted at me across the lot, saying "There goes a REAL Alabama fan!" I don't even *like* football....) That's the great thing about the Internet and writing, though: If you're busy writing, then it's way easy to ignore what's going on on the Internet. ;) What's more, if you want sites that take writing more seriously with less fluff....well, sir, they are definitely out there! BTW, I've been on the forums WAY more since NaNo ended less than a week ago than I was in the entirety of November. XD I find that pretty amusing. (Maybe I'm just a forum addict..?)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:55:00 +0700

"And yes, I'm sure publishers become a bit more swamped. But, I'm not sure what the point of saying that is exactly. Does that you think less NaNites should attempt to publish their books?" I want to address this part. From what I've read (and I'm not in the business), the problem isn't that there are manuscripts in the slush pile that came from NaNoWriMo. The problem is that there are unedited manuscripts in the slush pile that came from NaNoWriMo. That's why they are hitting the slush piles shortly after the event. The idea is to have a rough draft done at the end of the month. But editing is hard work and a lot of people think a spelling & grammar check covers it. If I had to read through a bunch of poorly-edited manuscripts and saw "NaNoWriMo" referenced in cover letters for them, I'd probably form a bad opinion of the event too. By all means, submit your NaNo novel for publication if you want. Just please, for the love of God, edit it first.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:42:11 +0700

I don't think that anyone here, least of all Dragonchilde, disagrees with the idea of expressing one's opinion. The problem is more how the opinions are voiced....what words are chosen, what tone is struck, etc. As for writing being about criticism, that's true if a person is writing specifically for their material to be read. But if I'm just writing, say, a personal diary entry, then I don't expect that to be critiqued by an editor or a teacher. :) However, if you're writing for a school assignment or for a publisher's deadline, then yes -- Criticism is a very important part. (Though I would wager to guess that just *how* important depends a lot on the editor/teacher, the intent of the assignment/novel, who the author is, and so on and so forth. To give an example (and this is only my opinion), the last Harry Potter book wasn't as well put together as the first one was. I imagine that fame, quickly approaching deadlines set primarily by ravenous fans, and a few other unusual factors contributed to the difference in quality.)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:43:37 +0700

While I'm in your corner for the most part, Mnemonicer, I'm not sure that the problem is rooted in forum policy. Not allowing criticism of individuals either specifically or as a category (outside of, I would think, ideological categories) isn't inherently abhorrent. I think it's only a problem because of the community fostered by the anti-quality, or at least quality-agnostic, dogma prevalent among the leadership. If the event were a little more self-driven, with users setting their own goals for the month of November (possibly with a default, beginner's goal of "Write 50,000 words" or, even better, "Write a complete work of fiction, or at least the skeleton of one containing beginning, middle, and end, of 30,000 words or more") then none of the Specific things we take issue with in this thread would be problems anymore. If someone's goal is to write hundreds of thousands of words in the month and they're making progress toward it then fine, good for them; I'm making progress toward my goal of writing a revision-ready rough draft of a novel. Or maybe writing a revision draft of a novel, since I'm not sure why "writing from scratch" is the only valid mode of participation according to the nano rules. Then the leadership would be free to encourage people to reach they goals, write quality words, and stay focused and motivated, instead of just chanting for 1700 words a day. That's the thing that really bothers me. I don't care what they do in the Fantasy forum. I mean, I'm writing Fantasy and I wish I could go in there for a serious discussion about worldbuilding, avoiding (or reinforcing) social and cultural themes in my made up world, and so forth, but, since I can't do that, I just don't go in there and what they get up to doesn't affect me. People keep coming in here and telling us to be more accepting and less judgement and happier. Well, I'd like it if nanowrimo's leadership didn't make me feel like I was in the wrong place and that I was a bad person for wanting to have an adult conversation about serious concerns in my writing instead of attending the pep rally or Creative Writing 100. We have a Young Writers Program. Maybe we need an Adult Writers Program, for people who care less about word count and more about prose quality and narrative structure. The YWP is supposed to get kids writing at all, nanowrimo is supposed to get people writing long works; something for people who know how to write and know that they are physically capable of putting 50k, or 75k, or 150k down on paper but would like to have a community and a dedicated 'excuse' time for improving the Quality of those words seems like a logical addition. But apparently just having the YWP and nanowrimo require paying more salaries than can be realistically afforded, so I guess I'd have better luck finding a writing support system outside of these events.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Dragonchilde — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 05:31:54 +0700

[quote=Mnemonicer] The problem I have is with the censorship being expressed by the mods for no reason. Yes, Dragonchilde, I am talking to you since you wield that stick. So long as the communications do not reach the level of cyberbullying, of which I am happy to provide you with the legal definition, or proceed to spillover into direct confrontations with individuals, then the harm is minimal. People should be allowed to have opinions other than "Yes, I'm awesome and you are too!" There is very little that is productive about that, even in terms of confidence building because it's blatantly false and self-serving. [/quote] I'm not asking that of you. What I'm asking is that you keep opinions about other participants and their efforts that cross the line into abusiveness to yourself. You are absolutely allowed to have opinions (even negative ones. Towards staff, even.) What I'm warning this thread about is that I had to shut down a previous thread because of abusive attitudes towards other participants. Respect is expected here, and if you're not okay with that, then it may be you'll be more comfortable on a less civil forum. These forums are FULL of negative opinions. Read through the critiques forum, and you'll see plenty of that. What I'm warning you against is taking those negative opinions and directing them at your fellow writers. [quote]Nano, by its very CHARTER cannot be just for the silly ninja-dares and Rah Rah Rah and No Criticism. Nano's primary purpose is not the adult November novel month. All that money we raise is for a very SERIOUS purpose: It's going to create educational programs in schools. That's why they're hiring new leadership - to get them into schools and teach our kids how to love reading and writing and [/quote] Actually, that's not it at all. Not even close. The reason we're hiring new leadership is because the old leadership is stepping down to pursue other dreams. If Chris Baty weren't stepping down, we certainly wouldn't be firing him. [quote]it's to teach them how to write in a competent manner as a professional - not a professional writer, as a professional, functioning member of the future work force. Yes, you can do this in a fun way, which is what Nano does. But to deny that Nano's business is, at its core, a serious business, is naive and or disingenuous. [/quote] I'm not quite sure where you've gotten this impression, but that's not what the YWP is about. It's not at all about quality. It's not about professionalism. It's about providing a way to make writing FUN. Not professional. The teacher's documents actually encourage teachers NOT to grade for grammar, punctuation, and craft. The purpose of the YWP is to encourage children to try something new, learn to write a story for fun, and write for something other than an A-perfect paper. [quote]So, the point here, to be succinct, is everyone doesn't get the gold trophy like they have since teeball. And if you can't handle the red ink, you'll never produce something coherent. And that's fine if you're here just to write. But that doesn't mean you should get to tell everyone who wants to be critical and express an opinion in a completely separate forum that their opinions aren't valid or welcome here. [/quote] I don't think I have said that. You can be critical, snarky, and downright rude to a point here. (As many people who have reported some things in other forums have found out.) What you can't do is cross over that line that was crossed in the previous thread, where a certain person (or group of persons) becomes the target of ridicule and abuse. The discussion had been revived, and I was (and still am) warning against that. If I was truly about censoring you and your opinions, I can assure you I would have done so. That's not my business. My business is not to make this forum happy, fluffy, and isolated from anything negative. (If it was... I'd quit.) It's to enforce the Terms and Conditions and Codes of Conduct, primarily. If I see trouble brewing, I will act to prevent it from exploding so I DON'T have to shut things down and censor it. After nearly a decade of operating on these forums, I've gotten a pretty good nose for these things.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 04:25:30 +0700

Mostly fame, I'd wager. As writers get more famous it tends to become harder to find editors willing to eviscerate their work and they gain the power to simply tell publishers, "No, print it like it is or don't print it at all." And they print it, because gigantic pile of money, that's why. The first Harry Potter book's first draft probably got flagged by the British Post or whatever they're called because the package was dripping red ink. By the seventh book Rowling was a far better writer, but the book on store shelves is probably almost the same as the first draft she submitted for editing. I mean, if you've made billions of dollars in royalties, licensing, and merchandise, why should you listen to anything some dope has to say about your pacing and construction?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:11:16 +0700

Heh. Indeed. "I mean, if you've made billions of dollars in royalties, licensing, and merchandise, why should you listen to anything some dope has to say about your pacing and construction?" Mainly, because ravenous, insane fans may try to find you and beat you to death with said books if it isn't done half-way decently. XD But really, if I was her, I'd be beyond ready to be done with the whole HP thing; it lasted well over a decade. Craziness!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:06:04 +0700

I'm not sure how it is possible to read that quote and come away thinking that the moral is "just have fun, what you do doesn't matter!" instead of "write the novel you've wanted to write but been afraid to try; it might surprise you how much fun you have!" But I guess it's possible, and I guess it's good to know that I'm not welcome here anymore I care about my writing. Thanks for clearing that up, DC. I think you should put that line back in the About Nanowrimo section. I'm pretty sure none of the folks in this thread (other those coming to tell us how we need to lighten up) would be here if we knew there was a "no serious writers" prejudice among the staff, hidden for "obvious reasons". I imagine a lot of other folks wouldn't, either. But that is probably the obvious reason.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:30:50 +0700

I don't even know where to start with responding to this DC. I really don't. I disagree with you on so many levels, it's beyond me. I'll simply point out that I'm in Los Angeles and have spoke to several people heavily involved in Nano about organizing other events and the coming departure of Mr. Baty. I was expressly told that his successor was hired because he had experience working with educational programming so that Nano's YWP could get into more schools because right now, they have a hard time with dealing with the standards boards that define curriculum in various states, particularly California. Two, I hope you're not a teacher. At the risk of being insensitive or negative and being banned for being critical, I highly question your ability to understand anything related to the teaching profession. Teaching is not about having fun. That's what day camp is for. It is not what school is for. FUN is not a goal in any activity in school. Or it should not be. Kids can go have fun on the weekend. Like adults, they have a job, and that's to learn. FUN is a methodology to engage students in the ultimate classroom goal: learn. FUN is a methodology used to inspire a love of learning in students in whatever particular topic the school, the parents, and the child itself determines. FUN is NOT the end goal. If you think that, and parents or educators do, it is no small wonder we can no longer compete, as Americans, in the global market. Even athletics are not solely about FUN. Athletics are about discipline and duty and teamwork and sportsmanship and competitiveness. Art classes are about the classics and culture and history and creativity and imagination. Increasingly, they are about new technologies and culture. Further, if the entire point of the YWP is to teach kids to write without any thought for grammar, I don't want it being taught to my non-existent kids. If you're going to spend a month telling kids it's ok to sound like illiterate texters who don't know how to spell or use commas, then you'd better spend a month editing what they wrote during that month so that they do learn how to use grammar. It's the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your Uncle jack off a horse, to be crass. It's also the difference between multimillion dollar deals. Contract jurisprudence is full of cases where the interpretation of a contract rests on the grammatical structure of a single clause. I believe YWP should be the best part of Nano, that our donations should go to that instead of write in parties and tshirts and forum costs and salaries for people. But if you think I want YWP taking up valuable education time when we already have a short schedule and not teaching any lessons about writing, and instead focusing on nothing more than producing garbage, then it can stay a club and stay out of our schools. I welcome you to take my thoughts to the organizers of Nano. I'm always happy to discuss education and the benefits of it. You're welcome to check out my educational background - I'm a firm believer in it. Despite my somewhat unconventional or lazy grammar, I was an English major and writing clearly is one of the most important tools in my profession. I already struggle with younger siblings who barely comprehend grammar in this age of texting and IMs as they graduate from high school and move into colleges. With the outside pressures to slack off on proper grammar so significant already, why would Nano, the YWP, and you encourage that? This post has run long, so I'll leave my other contentions alone. Needless to say, I have serious concerns with your statements.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

MrBadgerPants — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 09:07:49 +0700

Er, "anymore because I". I guess writing edit button code isn't fun.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Dragonchilde — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 10:42:28 +0700

[quote=MrBadgerPants] I'm not sure how it is possible to read that quote and come away thinking that the moral is "just have fun, what you do doesn't matter!" instead of "write the novel you've wanted to write but been afraid to try; it might surprise you how much fun you have!"[/quote] I'm not sure what you're quoting? I haven't said anything like that. [quote]But I guess it's possible, and I guess it's good to know that I'm not welcome here anymore I care about my writing. Thanks for clearing that up, DC. I think you should put that line back in the About Nanowrimo section. I'm pretty sure none of the folks in this thread (other those coming to tell us how we need to lighten up) would be here if we knew there was a "no serious writers" prejudice among the staff, hidden for "obvious reasons". I imagine a lot of other folks wouldn't, either. But that is probably the obvious reason. [/quote] There is no prejudice. I'm simply explaining why your preconceptions about what the event about were incorrect. The "obvious reason" is that it's insulting, and far from the inclusive nature the event was meant to be by its founder. If you feel that statements made years ago that have been removed mean you aren't welcome? Well... I don't really know what I can say that will dissuade you. You've seemed quite determined not to come back here next year at any rate. I do hope you got something out of your participation this year (your word count would imply that you did.) Good luck in your future endeavors!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Dragonchilde — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 10:36:31 +0700

[quote=Mnemonicer] I don't even know where to start with responding to this DC. I really don't. I disagree with you on so many levels, it's beyond me. I'll simply point out that I'm in Los Angeles and have spoke to several people heavily involved in Nano about organizing other events and the coming departure of Mr. Baty. I was expressly told that his successor was hired because he had experience working with educational programming so that Nano's YWP could get into more schools because right now, they have a hard time with dealing with the standards boards that define curriculum in various states, particularly California. [/quote] That may be why Grant was specifically hired, but that's not why we started looking. The reason new staff is being hired is because Chris Baty is stepping down. What they looked for in a new candidate is separate for WHY they were looking. That is definitely part of the reason he was chosen over other candidates, but I assure you, that is NOT the sole reason we were looking for new leadership. The Executive Director handles so much more than just the YWP. The YWP director handles most of that. I'm fairly heavily involved in NaNo myself. ;) I was in the staff meetings where his hiring was discussed. I have a pretty good idea of the whys and whynots. Those people you spoke to... did they live in LA? [quote]Two, I hope you're not a teacher. At the risk of being insensitive or negative and being banned for being critical, I highly question your ability to understand anything related to the teaching profession. Teaching is not about having fun. That's what day camp is for. It is not what school is for. FUN is not a goal in any activity in school. Or it should not be. Kids can go have fun on the weekend. Like adults, they have a job, and that's to learn. FUN is a methodology to engage students in the ultimate classroom goal: learn. FUN is a methodology used to inspire a love of learning in students in whatever particular topic the school, the parents, and the child itself determines. FUN is NOT the end goal. [/quote] I've never pretended to be in a teaching profession. I'm not telling you what the teaching profession is about. I'm telling you what the purpose of NaNoWriMo's Young Writer's Program is, as I have understood it during my three years managing the very forums the children participate in. We do have plans to add curriculum for schools to use, but this IS the purpose of the YWP itself. What the curriculum itself in the future may be different from the overall purpose of the YWP as it stands right now (thanks to the pressures of school systems), but whether you like what it is or not, this information is available publicly, on the YWP website for your perusal. One of the lessons involved in older kids is to encourage kids NOT to edit while writing during November. Allow me to quote from the YWP website itself: [quote]National Novel Writing Month happens every November! It's a fun, seat-of-your-pants writing event where the challenge is to complete an entire novel in just 30 days. For one month, you get to lock away your inner editor, let your imagination take over, and just create![/quote] Having fun IS the purpose of the YWP. It's in the very first statement about it. Because fun is the key to unlocking so much more. [quote]If you think that, and parents or educators do, it is no small wonder we can no longer compete, as Americans, in the global market. Even athletics are not solely about FUN. Athletics are about discipline and duty and teamwork and sportsmanship and competitiveness. Art classes are about the classics and culture and history and creativity and imagination. Increasingly, they are about new technologies and culture. [/quote] I think you and I are talking about completely different things. I'm well aware of what education is for; I have two children myself, and am intimately involved in their education. However, I also realize that there are many valuable lessons children can take from things that are fun. You don't have to give up education to have fun; I would hope that anyone involved in the teaching profession would understand as much. One can learn many things from the process of writing a novel in this way, that have nothing to do with grammar and punctuation, and I'd say they were just as valuable to learn. [quote]Further, if the entire point of the YWP is to teach kids to write without any thought for grammar, I don't want it being taught to my non-existent kids. If you're going to spend a month telling kids it's ok to sound like illiterate texters who don't know how to spell or use commas, then you'd better spend a month editing what they wrote during that month so that they do learn how to use grammar. [/quote] The entire point of the YWP isn't about teaching kids to write without thought for grammar. It's to tell a story, and challenge themselves to do something new, without having to worry about the same pressures they're used to when writing for school. There are even exercises for locking up your inner editor and just writing. Its about waiting to edit until the tale is told. I suggest reading over the YWP program website. It tells you all about what it is and does for students and teachers alike. It's filled with tens of thousands of enthusiastic, thrilled kids who love what they do. They're by and large far more articulate than most kids I'm used to their ages, and a true joy to work with. I'd say that the approach of locking away your inner editor and just writing is certainly working, and working well. Of course, all teachers arrange how they teach the event in their own classroom; many do focus on grammar, and ignore that aspect of it. It works the way the teacher wants to work it. [quote]It's the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your Uncle jack off a horse, to be crass. It's also the difference between multimillion dollar deals. Contract jurisprudence is full of cases where the interpretation of a contract rests on the grammatical structure of a single clause. [/quote] We're not about teaching kids grammatical structure of clauses, contracts, and multimillion dollar deals. They have (here in the US anyway) 13 years of that in regular school. What the YWP focuses on is creativity, time management, confidence, even fluency. They learn pretty quickly that when you write thousands of words, it's hard to read them over again when they're not properly punctuated, but they shouldn't be afraid to write a story because they don't know when to use a semicolon or a colon. [quote]I believe YWP should be the best part of Nano, that our donations should go to that instead of write in parties and tshirts and forum costs and salaries for people. [/quote] Aside from the fact that we do not pay for "write-in parties", without t-shirts, forum costs, and salaries... there would be no NaNoWriMo at all. No YWP. No nothing. You wouldn't be here, and neither would I. [quote]But if you think I want YWP taking up valuable education time when we already have a short schedule and not teaching any lessons about writing, and instead focusing on nothing more than producing garbage, then it can stay a club and stay out of our schools. [/quote] Then don't teach the YWP. [quote]I welcome you to take my thoughts to the organizers of Nano. I'm always happy to discuss education and the benefits of it. You're welcome to check out my educational background - I'm a firm believer in it. Despite my somewhat unconventional or lazy grammar, I was an English major and writing clearly is one of the most important tools in my profession. I already struggle with younger siblings who barely comprehend grammar in this age of texting and IMs as they graduate from high school and move into colleges. With the outside pressures to slack off on proper grammar so significant already, why would Nano, the YWP, and you encourage that? [/quote] In short? Because we believe that by getting them to love writing and storytelling while not stressing over whether their commas are improperly spliced, that opens the door to more advanced skills in the future. We tell kids that it's okay to love writing for the sake of writing, to tell a story for the inherent joy it provides. And surprisingly, they are getting it. Every day, we get glowing emails from teachers, parents, and students alike about the improvements their students show. Where kids who hated writing and reading in class actually start to get excited about their characters, about their plots. Personally? I saw my own kindergartener's smile and glow of achievement when she wrote her very first story, illustrated it, and presented it to me with the biggest smile I've ever seen on her face. I could have shot her down and started covering it with red marks, but she'll get plenty of that throughout her schooling, and lord knows I correct her grammar enough as it is. Just this once, it was okay to let her just write and tell me a story. Something about the program is certainly working, I'd say. As for passing that on to the organizers, you're welcome to do so yourself. You can email them at info@nanowrimo.org. We always welcome criticism and suggestions.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:36:52 +0700

I pretty much agree with this. It was the teachers that made learning fun that I learned the most from in school and college. But the ones that made it nothing but drudgery? I couldn't tell you a single thing they taught me. I may not have kids, but I do remember what it was like to BE a kid. And honestly, if someone doesn't have some element of fun with writing or art or sports, then why do it? One can take something fun seriously, but still have fun with it. :) I'm not sure where the two are mutually exclusive.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:17:29 +0700

One last statistic: first nano was 21 participants with 6 successes. That's 28.6%. (correct my numbers if I'm wrong) It would be nice to scale that to the number of people we have now, percentage-wise. That would be quite an achievement.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:33:20 +0700

I'm going to go out on a few limbs here, so be forewarned. :) First, I think that as NaNo gets bigger and bigger, especially with young writers, that the percentage of those who "finish" probably won't be as high....but I don't see where there's anything wrong with that. In my region, the kick-off party had over 50 people in attendance. By November 30th, our group had dwindled to about 10 or so. I don't consider that a "failure"; there's lots and lots of fun things that several folks will attend the opening of, but only a few will really stick with. That's just the way life is, so it didn't surprise nor depress me. "The story and only the story should matter in nano." I wish this was true, but unfortunately, there's all sorts of other things that are going on in people's lives that can easily shove that half-written story into the background. Besides that, I imagine there's a lot of folks who sign up for NaNo, type for a few days or a week, and then realize writing just isn't their thing. Because of this, I think judging the success of NaNo by how many folks validated can be misleading. It's mostly a self-challenge, and if some folks feel like it isn't for them even after they sign up and all, I'm not sure where the harm is in that.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 14:55:14 +0700

Zenken, thanks for bringing the thread back around to the original argument. DC and I did get derailed into an educational debate. As I did mention above, I had many issues, but the educational one piqued me most, so that's where I went with my subsequent followup. B

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:40:22 +0700

Okay, NaNoWriMo is what you make of it. You can be very serious or not. My husband and I used it as a motivator to finally write the story we've been kicking about for years. We're nearly finished part one and are now starting the editing phase. This is huge for us. We've both written a lot of various things - not published - over the years, but writing this novel seemed so intimidating. But every weekday evening and every weekend for one entire month, we focused on this and got 50k words of our story done. I know some writers here will scoff at that, but we think it's pretty freakin' amazing. I don't know if we'll publish or not. We have two more parts to write, and who knows if there's enough of a market for classic D&D sword and sorcery to take in new authors. It's a bit of an 80s thing (and those 80s era TSR novels were totally our inspiration). I do know that when we are done editing, we're going to self-publish Part 1 for us and our nearest and dearest. I don't think this makes us any more or less writers than anyone else who isn't published and I don't think it makes NaNoWriMo more or less appropriate for us. I'm a Pissed-Off Cynic. The rah-rah cheerleading, the "throw in a ninja", and above all the social-networking aspect so common in the younger generations irritates me. This is why Mr. Lyria wrote alone (he never even went to the website to post word counts), I only attended a few write-ins (my RL is awesome, very low key and just what I needed to shake things up a little), and I happily found this Pissed Off Cynic thread. I delibertly stayed out of quite a few parts of the forums because I wanted to avoid the attitudes I found there. Look, there will always be a fluff bunny quotient here and this will be encouraged. But I don't see any reason why Pissed Off Cynics can't have a place too. I do think we need to tread carefully on not calling out specific people, though. The moderators made that clear and this is their website. It's not like this is public space.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 21:43:29 +0700

Didn't you make a few closing remarks and endeavor not to return to any Cynic thread in the future yesterday? For someone who was so adamant about the "vehemence" that so confuses him here, you don't seem to be in any hurry to leave. Maybe you should endeavor a little harder. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 01:15:50 +0700

Both of you missed the key turn of my argument above. I did not say you had to take school Seriously and could not have Fun. I simply said that Fun was not the Goal of any endeavor. It was a method, a means of teaching. Fun has its place in the classroom, absolutely, because it makes children enjoy it. But there should always be something MORE to the lesson that Fun. As presently constructed, based on DC's and other comments here, I question where there's any lesson being taught that should consume a month of valuable classroom time if the sole purpose is Fun. Let me spell it out one more time. Fun =/= Goal. Fun = Methodology.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 22:37:31 +0700

What can I say; curiosity got the better of me! ^_^

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:07:43 +0700

Obviously you take chiding people for taking NaNo too seriously very seriously. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Anahlynn — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:13:50 +0700

I think trying to use the fact that the poster said he/she was leaving as an agument against him/her is pretty weak.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Incorporal — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:38:37 +0700

I think it's a good point, there's a lot of moral grandstanding in the "And this is my last post on the thread" type of comments, as if you're saying "You all can gripe about the details, but I am done, and am on to More Important Things In Real Life". If there's anything worse than moral grandstanding, it's coming back afterwards to expound more. And this will be my last post on this subject as I am deeply afraid of being charged of Thread Derailment and or Targeting Another Poster, two serious crimes in the Nanoworld. ;)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Quarks_Uglier_Brother — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 03:15:19 +0700

Surely Nano is what we all make of it on our own terms. I think it is great that someone hits 1m words, couldn't if I tried. This year I went for it to do three novellas, I did two and I'm working on the third right now. Surely, (don't call me shirley) if you don't enjoy something you don't do it, you don't want to do dares don't. The biggest test for any story is if the writer likes it, then worry about publishing, but only if that's your thing. Otherwise I agree with the point that this is getting way too serious over nothing. I could see the point if you were moaning about editing, get thee behind me satan, but like everything else it has to be done. Come on Cynics find something more constructive to do with your time. Knocking Nano is so uncool. Qub

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:18:42 +0700

Nothing grand about it; I was just having a bad day. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:40:50 +0700

I dunno; when we had art class in elementary school, I'm pretty sure the goal WAS fun. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:28:34 +0700

More the bleeding brain variety here. x_x;; Part of it is that I've realized that I'll either have to write one or two prequels, or make this one novel a LOT longer! I'm in favor of the latter....but that essentially means a re-write, and a LOT of work and stress! I think my anxiety medication will come in handy in 2012...

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Quarks_Uglier_Brother — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 05:11:49 +0700

perhaps since the first time I started writing let alone nanoing, I plan for a wall of editing. Three novellas, but only when the third is finished. I don't know about anyone else but I intend doing a screen edit then plan to print them off in chunks to do a manual check. I have no idea how long it should take. Wish me luck. As per post by chinalizard I can see prequels as well, but work from an edited peice as an ankor. Qub

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:25:35 +0700

Agreed. :)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

bibliosylph — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:48:33 +0700

I think this should be reported for insulting specific other people, most of whom were not knocking NaNo at all to begin with, until a rather long and tangential argument began between a very few people. It was an interesting argument, actually. But little to do with this thread. You don't want to be a cynic? Do not come in here and tell others how to be one.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

zenken — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:38:42 +0700

[quote=Quarks_Uglier_Brother] Surely Nano is what we all make of it on our own terms. I think it is great that someone hits 1m words, couldn't if I tried. This year I went for it to do three novellas, I did two and I'm working on the third right now. Surely, (don't call me shirley) if you don't enjoy something you don't do it, you don't want to do dares don't. [/quote] If you don't want to hear about other people's criticisms, don't read the thread. You might want to think about doling out advice you don't heed. [quote=Quarks_Uglier_Brother] The biggest test for any story is if the writer likes it, then worry about publishing, but only if that's your thing. Otherwise I agree with the point that this is getting way too serious over nothing.[/quote] There's a difference between a writer liking their work and having fun. As I've already pointed out, you can have fun getting to 50k and beyond or you can have fun writing the story you've been meaning to write for some time -- and that's serious. Just because you don't take your writing seriously is an assumption that everyone else should be the same. Feel free to comment, but let me ask these questions: Why, 8 days after nano is over, do you bother in here? Is because it's the only active thread and you were bored? [quote=Quarks_Uglier_Brother] I could see the point if you were moaning about editing, get thee behind me satan, but like everything else it has to be done. Come on Cynics find something more constructive to do with your time. Knocking Nano is so uncool. Qub [/quote] For the most part, discussions in here have been constructive. You haven't added anything to the discussion but the typical 'rah rah you can write and it doesn't matter how good your writing is' dogma. There was a completely different thread by other folks about how nano was not what is used to be. I take it you never bothered reading that, since it's not active.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 04:22:29 +0700

Perhaps our vehemence was particularly confusing to you that day, you poor dear. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:11:44 +0700

The goal of art class is NOT fun. I don't understand why you refuse to understand this. I already touched on art in my earlier posts, but I'll do it again. Art is intended via a use of fun METHODOLOGY to teach students to think creatively and imagine. It is also to teach basic art concepts and basic art history, at least at that age. As you progress, you learn more substantial art concepts like how to draw still life and how to fire clay and more detailed art history and, today, digital art software programs. But you don't teach it in school simply because it's FUN. The Fun is to make the lesson entertaining so that it sinks in more and, perhaps, encourages you to come back for more higher level concepts. Witness the old game Oregon Trail. That was fun, yes. It was, however, an educational game intended to teach young students about history and the American West expansion and the challenges they faced. Witness Number Crunchers, a game in the early 90s intended to teach students how to use basic math skills. It was a FUN method to teach very serious skills. I am frustrated by your inability and/or refusal to understand my argument.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Quarks_Uglier_Brother — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 05:03:33 +0700

Definitely guilty of tarring all with the same brush. I say report me and I will plead guilty. Sorry, I await my punishment Qub

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Mnemonicer — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 06:14:03 +0700

I agree. This is much more personal than the action that locked the last thread. The last thread was locked and the other person wasn't even a participant. You are coming in here and knocking participants of the thread. I call double-standard.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Quarks_Uglier_Brother — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:34:19 +0700

Man (I mean this in a wholly non gender specific way, whilst being all inclusive, not tarring everyone with the same brush) I have never seen one of my posts so disected and so heavily scrutinised. I appreciate your efforts to enlighten me. I think it comes down to what you want from writing, I doff my hat to you and all others who want to approach it professionally. Me, well I just enjoy my writing and as i churn out between six and eight uneditted piece of work a year. My problem remains editing which I have said I will face head on this year. I know it three novella will keep me busy for a while. One on topic point however, I don't feel any shame in encouraging others to hit either the set winner target or their personal goals. It's meant to be a community of writers, there's enough broken communities out there. One off topic, I would request that txt tlk should be reduced to a minimum for old geezers like me. I look forward to all replies, but in the meantime I hope not to offend anyones sensibilities by my disjointed response. Qub

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:21:55 +0700

"...you can have fun getting to 50k and beyond or you can have fun writing the story you've been meaning to write for some time -- and that's serious." To be honest, I did both. :) That's not arrogance or anything, but the 50k NaNo challenge helped me to sit my butt down every day and actually write on the darned thing. Plus, I liked updating the chart to see where I was going. There were several aspects going on for me with NaNo. The first was that I KNEW this story, in the end, would be *well* over 50k, so the idea of reaching that wordcount in a month wasn't a bad one. Second, it helped me to explore the story further to see where I wanted to take it, or whether I wanted to go in this direction or that one. I avoided adding ninjas or Tom Selleck's mustache, because I'd already done that kind of writing years before....and didn't feel it was going to help me any this go 'round. Did I take it seriously? Yes. Did I have fun with (i. e., enjoyed) it? Yes! Do I feel like I learned some valuable things? YES! So, for me anyways, I'm looking forward to what else the OLL has planned in 2012. :) I may even do Script Frenzy; who knows??

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

cosmam — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 02:32:37 +0700

I'm not sure that I could have bought anything from them after seeing that, at least not without twitching uncontrollably. Have you noticed the unseasonable candy yet? Specifically, the fact that Easter candy is already out. I wish I were kidding... Link, for the curious.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 02:38:45 +0700

The food almost makes up for the music. I can understand show-biz hacks revving up teh nostalgia and home-sweet-home vibe. But it frustrates me to think that this is the only month out of the year when it's acceptable to hear people sing about alleviating poverty and promoting good will among mankind, when we don't seem to give two shits about such things the rest of the year. As a nonbeliever, I get a little weary of not being able to walk down the street in Boston without seeing magic stars and magic babies and magic lamps everywhere. This in a nation where Xians like to complain that they're being "marginalized" by secularism every time someone says "happy holidays" instead of invoking the magic Baby Jesus. Yeah, right. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:11:47 +0700

I know I merry all the time! (That's sarcasm. :3 )

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:13:47 +0700

Wow, that's scary. What *really* concerns me is the question of just how many times (i. e., years) that very same candy (not the product, but the actual, individual pieces) have been put out before. x_x;;;; I can't remember where I saw it, but I've heard that the current Cadbury's are twice the size they were when I was a kid in the 80s. That's...kind of frightening.

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Lyria2 — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 04:16:01 +0700

We're giving two shits about it this month?

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:16:04 +0700

I guess all I have to do is mention phony piety and you appear. Happy holidays! -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:16:17 +0700

BTW, my husband pointed out to me the other day that I always get snippy during the official Holiday season. :/ I didn't even realize, but it makes sense; I'm just not a fan of family holidays. Stresses me out. (Yes, that goes for Turkey Day too.)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:18:59 +0700

What's your hubby's opinion on adults who use smilies? -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:37:41 +0700

He couldn't care less, to be honest. :) Most people don't, I've found. (This wouldn't happen to be Cane from the PS2 boards, would it..?)

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:41:53 +0700

No, I'm not a gamer. Evidently you've made yourself a tiresome nuisance on more than one board. But didn't you launch a proclamation from on high saying that you're leaving this forum anyway? When can we expect that? -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

chinalizard — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:57:16 +0700

Hrm, guess I didn't really explain that very thoroughly. Guess this is as good an opportunity as any. The day I posted that, I was already having a particularly bad day IRL, and I admit to taking the tone of the conversation perhaps more seriously than was really warranted. You're right in that aspect, Shem: I shouldn't have posted a "Goodbai 4-EVRRR!!1 D:> " kind of thing. I apologize to you and the rest of the board. I keep returning here because conversation has since moved on to more interesting topics than the validity of NaNo. I'm *very* interested in improving my writing, and I think folks here have some awesome insight and advice. However, I'm really not interested in the kind of debate that was going on up there. (Yes, admittedly, I got sucked into it....and I shouldn't have gotten involved.) What's more, I can get pretty cynical myself (though it's more in short, verbal bursts than anything I'd typically write out online), so it's nice to know that I'm not alone when I start to feel ornery about writing or whatever. Anyways, I hope this clears up any confusion. I look forward to the future of the Cynics thread all in all. Happy Festivus, Shem!

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

Shem-the-Penman — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 06:30:09 +0700

[quote=Lyria2] We're giving two shits about it this month? [/quote] Ha ha! That's the spirit of the old Cynics thread. NaNo's over, I'm gone. See you next year, folks. -Shem

Re: Pissed Off Cynics 2: Cynic Harder!

annabelle2024 — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 00:27:31 +0700

I wasn't bitching about editing. I actually look forward to it. Trust me I know that my first draft is shit. I was just wanting to know the other views of like minded people.