Storyshop

Mission Statement

Storyshop is going to be an attempt to create a genuine workshop environment at WritersCo. What this entails can be broken into a convenient list!

1. To develop members' writing through peer review.

2. To develop members' reviewing skills through group critiques.

3. To fine tune individual stories for publication.

Page Rules

1. All members are to be treated with respect. I don't think this will be a problem.

2. Submitted stories should be in keeping with whatever story aspect we're working on that month/section. You may break up your story for this purpose.

3. All content is allowed, but understand that writing with pointless sex or violence will probably get a bad review.

4. No poetry. There are plenty of poetry contests on WC, check them out.

5. Members are to add their names to the participants list. Contact information (messenger accounts, generally) are provided voluntarily.

6. All reviewers will use the same page for an individual story. Please see Storyshop - The Little Mermaid II for how a page should be more or less set up. Reviewers don't have to follow the subheading style that's there, but must all use the same page and preferably use a button.

7. Reviewers/ees must adhere to the code of etiquette.

8-infinity: open, if I forgot something!

Code of Etiquette

There are a few rules of etiquette that should be observed during the review process. List ho! *skitters*

Personal Etiquette


1. Do not take good criticism personally. Unless the reviewer is being an ass and not following the other rules, Storyshop's critiques are meant to point out what you could do right or better and/or highlight weaknesses in your style. Rejection letters are a part of the business, and if you can't take constructive criticism without sulking, you won't be able to to take those well either.


2. Don't be an ass. When reviewing a piece, keep the jabs, digs, smartass remarks, and any holier-than-thou opinions out. Eventually, we'll all have to deal with editors who won't show any tact, but we certainly don't have to put up with that here. Also, do not give a bad review to a person who you don't like, or who has given you a review you didn't like.


3. Treat all members equally. I don't care if you're rich or poor, gay or straight, twelve or seventy. You will treat everyone else with due respect. See the above two rules. If you have a problem with someone's review or their reaction to yours, and you can't solve it civilly, come to [Mister Saint].


Reviewer Guidelines


1. Read first as a reader, not an editor. Don't go in looking for something to correct right away. Read it to enjoy it, and note what bothers you.


2. Be polite and focused. Do not - I repeat, do not - attack the writer or hir ideas personally. We're looking for professionalism here, so keep your comments relevant to the work.


3. Review technical and literary elements. Do not try to redirect the plot. If you think Jim and Sandy ought to get married at the end instead of going there separate ways, you may bring this up; however, do not insist on it, and remember this is someone's work you're dissecting.


4. Keep your mind open. Just because you don't write it this way does not mean it shouldn't be written this way. If you don't use repetition, allegory, or red herrings in your work, don't mark those things as wrong in someone else's writing. Note that if you, the reader, have never heard a turn of phrase (which is definitely possible with our regional differences) you should not claim that it doesn't exist, either. Ask about it, and perhaps suggest an alternative.


5. If something doesn't make sense, ask! Not one of us knows everything. If you don't recognize a phrase, a place, a piece of geography that seems unusual, a weapon, a vehicle, a term, or anything else, ask the writer politely.


6. Be general. The biggest problems are what we're concerned about first. If you can't find big problems, great! Move on to the small stuff, but don't nitpick. Much.

Storyshop