Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

69161Re: [BackpackGearTest] Re: EDIT ADDENDUM: Owner Review - GoLite Hex 3 - by tim todd

Expand Messages
  • Steven H. Miller
    Feb 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Ted and Jason:

      Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
      Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and
      I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see when
      the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)

      But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over the
      past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
      which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles" involved
      here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in the
      online lessons.

      Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so often, a
      new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
      twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense of
      outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too

      It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers if a
      couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
      since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your

      Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
      couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
      advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:

      a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as the
      author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
      involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you wrote
      it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
      somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
      needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
      writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel that
      it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
      part with it at some point anyway.

      b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. Criticism
      of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your work
      is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human being
      when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first time I
      sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
      thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
      what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
      rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
      don't know you. They've never even met you.")

      c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry, it's
      not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. If
      it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
      taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your first
      day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and pointed
      to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's not
      square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. You'd
      get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped you
      out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof wouldn't
      sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
      squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
      worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about it.
      You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
      imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.

      All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
      It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing you,
      just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
      what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I suspect
      that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so far.


      On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

      > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
      > somewhere
      > > that's accessible to new reporters?  It might ease the editor's work
      > > considerably.
      > >
      > > SteveM
      > Not to mention the writer's...
      > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
      > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
      > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
      > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
      > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
      > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has pretty
      > comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
      > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
      > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
      > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
      > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
      > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
      > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
      > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
      > Ted.
      > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
      > ▪  Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
      > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >  BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      > Service.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic