Edit Reposted Orginal comment:
I agree with the basic sentiments "of putting as much or more effort as you would like readers to put into understanding it". And I also think the notes you have made about formatting are really helpful. I also like that you put Longspeak's encouraging not at the beginning. But it makes really sad that you wrote this at all. You state at the beginning that this is what you have learned about the Citadel based on all your readings. What you learned was a list of things not to do and a list of things not to write about. All this time among the Citadel community and the only advice you choose to give is sticks and not carrots. What has the citadel done to you to make you so bitter? Are we that awful? Are we that biased? Do the scores matter that much? The scores shouldn't matter right? Are they a just a bit of social currency to make the Citadel more interactive or they genuine judgement of you as writer or thinker. By saying that these are things you shouldn't write about to achieve success at the citadel you are placing the "game of the citadel" above the voice of the author. Shouldn't we give every author and idea a chance? I am not saying everything is good or everything is worthwhile or we shouldn't be critical. I am saying let us keep an open mind and, once again, it is depressing that you had only negative advice. What is more shocking and sad is that everyone here loves this. People love a list of things they hate.
But I surrender on this point though. It is the internet and we are playing a game with nerfed consequences. If this 'content club' is what you want the Citadel to be then that is what it is. The community can use the scoring system to enforce the norms. I recognize that I may be attacked for voicing descent, and I accept that. Finally, I think the best advice you give somebody who wants to "succeed" at the scores is that they have to play the social game of the Citadel. If you want higher average scores get people to vote for 'you' and not your content.
Go to Comment
I changed my vote to a 5 on this to try and placate Longspeak who asserts that anyone that doesn't agree with him is an idiot. I am sorry you got so angry. I hope the 5 makes you feel better or least encourages you to engage in a repsectful back forth instead of insults. But as I revisit this in 2017, am I the only one that sees the attitude of this post as unwelcoming. When I read this it is like reading a formalized version of the critiques this following post gotGo to Comment
It must be said that this has been in my work folder for a very, very long time and is not in response to any recent submissions.
Also, Moonhunter has a wide range of excellent advice columns you can peruse, especially if you are seeking the Golden Standard.
Go to Comment
These are also my own Opinions, not hard and fast rules, and come from my observations looking at thousands of submissions.
Edit to add: My strong disagreement below was with Axle's ORIGINAL comment, not the... altered version.
I strongly disagree with Axle's opinion. Pretty much every word of it. Except the bit at the end, which I could not parse well enough to agree or disagree with. I thought so at the time, and instead of responding, I just added my vote.
Your advice, which I took to be aimed at inexperienced writers, is all great advice about things new writers should avoid, or at best tread very lightly around. Of course it's *possible* to make an interesting piece using one or more of those cliches, but it's much more difficult.
I voted this a 5/5 at the time, and I stand by that. It's great, useful advice for an inexperienced writer considering his first work. And anyone who says otherwise probably has a sub in-work about an orphan character named after himself with mysterious, unexplained abilities and a cool "not magic" weapon that devours souls. :P