general observation

[peter]

Hello `everyone` .. Would it not be more beneficial to this website, if the intellectual elite spent some time looking at the unreviewed writers. Picking on certain writers serves absolutely no purpose .Everyone has their own opinions , no one is right or wrong . If you quote some so called expert your not `thinking` for yourself but merely projecting a second hand version and lose your individuality .

[Sooz]

Now I'm sure you don't mean me, here. I think if somebody was going to tag me with a label, intellectually elite would be way down the list, in fact, my phrase book wouldn't even contain intellectually elite. I'll know it's for me when you post one for the Unintelligent masses.

What I do is always read and comment on the people who have been good enough to comment on my stuff. After that, I just tend to work down the new posts, but I agree with you, in future after returning the reads that I've had, I will go to unreviewed stuff.

Your stuff is different to the norm, you have a style all of your own and I think you're just going to have to accept that most people, especially people reading you for the first time, aren't going to get it. What I suggest you do is keep writing, keep posting and just accept what you're given, using any piece of advice that you can use and binning the rest as not being right for you. Most of all, don't let it get you down.

[Sue]

Having been on GW for several years I have seen this kind of comment crop up periodically, that there is an "elite." The complaint is usually from a newcomer. Sometimes the accusation is that the elite snobbishly ignore everybody else who's not part of the elite. Sometimes the complaint is that they go around the site being snarky about the stuff produced by the non-elite.

The truth is that GW is like every group of people in the real world - there are some people who like each other's work and others who don't like anyone's but their own, and some people who come to learn and some who come to show off and some trolls who only come to make a damn bloody nuisance of themselves. And there are some who have been in the writing and reading business for the whole of a long lifetime.

These writers usually have very sound views on what works and what doesn't. They are often published, often editors of publications themselves. That doesn't make them perfect but it does indicate they probably know what they are talking about. They are open to new ideas and encourage breaking from strict structures where that will help the writer to grow. They spend time trying to explain these mysteries to the newcomers. They do read and comment on newcomers' and unreviewed work.

So, Peter, where are you in that spectrum?

[peter]

Hello .. unfortunately your both missing the point . I`m certainly not complaining about people criticising me . I`m probably the least person effected . Those concerned `know` what i`m talking about and psychology and little`quotes`, just confirm it .AS for where am I in a spectrum well I would say to you ,`was frued a fraud`.Youcan play your mind games but it just shows ignorance

[Sue]

`was frued a fraud`.Youcan play your mind games but it just shows ignorance

Hmm, I don't think I am the person you are referring to here. at least, I hope not.

[Deborahhambrook]

'was frued a fraud.' is this a question, statement, or just a slip? And how does Freud relate to you and your reasons for using the site? Sorry, I don't understand. I don't think anyone is playing mind games. You got some straight answers to your quandary, that's all.

Keep writing, and all the best.

Deb x

[peter]

hello . I was referring to the question in the box above the comment . `What spectrum , are you in`.I probably should have replied `Was the father of psychology , impotent , or important` . The fraudulent `slip` , wasn`t meant to `trip` anyone out . That was a bonus , it`s just my sense of humour .

[Deborahhambrook]

I'm sorry Peter, I still don't get it, but you've made me laugh so much I'm nearly peeing myself. You've really cheered me up today, so thank you. You are a breath of fresh air!

Deb X

[Sue]

I don't get it either, so I'm obviously pretty stupid and it isn't worth me trying to understand your free thinking.

[Brett]

Hmm - what may be beneficial to the website (reviewing unreviewed posts or not) would be helpful comments rather than anecdotes or word-arsery, perhaps? To encourage the writer to look at improving a piece - is that not the purpose of this site?

Although I am well aware that you consider yourself a free thinker 'your both missing the point ' rather than 'you're both missing the point' is just a tad too radical for me.