An edit:
a revised paragraph has been added to the rules;
Due to poets being overly eager to post poetry (too many poems at once) without giving feedback elsewhere. A new rule exists;
5. Non-compliance with feedback requirements. The Pig Pen could not exist without the interaction of its members. In return for the right to post your own poems and receive comments/critique, you must attempt to provide honest and meaningful feedback on the poems of other members, or interact in some other fashion on threads other than those you create for your own poetry. Failure to do so will result in restricted posting privileges in some parts of the forum. These restrictions may be lifted if they decide to participate fairly elsewhere in the forum. People affected will see "CONTACT A MODERATOR* under their nic name. The restrictions will be the inability to start a thread in some of the poetry forums. They will however be able to leave replies and post normally elsewhere.
Meaningful interaction does not include short, generic comments on poems (e.g. "I really like this"; "great flow"; "I can relate to this" etc).
The Pig Pen could not exist without the interaction of its members. In return for the right to post your own poems and receive comments/ critique, you must attempt to provide honest and meaningful feedback on the poems of other members or interact in some other fashion on threads other than those you create for your own poetry.
Until now, we have not set any specific requirements in this area. However, after discussion among several members and moderators, a decision has been made to limit this selfish behaviour. Polite requests and not-so-subtle hints have been unsuccessful, so we are now implementing the following rule:
Any member who posts more than three (3) poems without contributing in a meaningful way to threads other than their own (whether poems or discussions) will have restricted posting privileges in some parts of the forum. These restrictions may be lifted if they decide to participate fairly elsewhere in the forum. people affected will see "CONTACT A MODERATOR* under their nic name. The restriction will be the inability to start a thread in some of the poetry forums. they will however be able to leave replies.
Meaningful interaction does not include short, generic comments on poems (e.g. "I really like this"; "great flow"; "I can relate to this" etc). This is a community. From now on, you will only get as much out of it as you are prepared to put in.
(11-21-2012, 10:31 AM)Leanne Wrote: [ -> ]The Pig Pen could not exist without the interaction of its members. In return for the right to post your own poems and receive comments/ critique, you must attempt to provide honest and meaningful feedback on the poems of other members or interact in some other fashion on threads other than those you create for your own poetry.
Until now, we have not set any specific requirements in this area. However, after discussion among several members and moderators, a decision has been made to limit this selfish behaviour. Polite requests and not-so-subtle hints have been unsuccessful, so we are now implementing the following rule:
Any member who posts more than three (3) poems without contributing in a meaningful way to threads other than their own (whether poems or discussions) will have their threads locked for comments. These threads may be unlocked if the behaviour changes.
Meaningful interaction does not include short, generic comments on poems (e.g. "I really like this"; "great flow"; "I can relate to this" etc). This is a community. From now on, you will only get as much out of it as you are prepared to put in.
Ve haf...oh no, we have a v courageous German member....
But, although it is unlikely to apply to me, what does 3 poems mean? 3 in succession? What if a person has commented, then posts 3 poems?
Basically what this is getting at Abu is when a person is posting poetry for critique and not responding to any other thread on the site other than the ones they initiated. If someone posts three poems over any period of time and simply doesn't give feedback to other poems than this rule is meant to apply to them. We want somewhat reciprocal but not necessarily equal feedback to be given. If a person comments before ever posting a poem in someone else's thread than they are not what this rule is in place to correct.
Expanding a little more on Leanne's well stated comments on what constitutes acceptable feedback, from a practical level I know critiquing can freak some people out when they're new to it. We aren't expecting polished literary magazine worthy critiques. What we are expecting is honest reader reaction. While your critique may have some of these I like that, I don't like that phrases sprinkled in it, on the whole we expect your critique to at least pass this bar. I like it...(and here's why). I don't like it...(and here's why). Again this is intended to deal with people who attempt to game the rules. Does that make sense? Happy to bring clarity in any way I can.
(11-22-2012, 03:01 AM)abu nuwas Wrote: [ -> ]Ve haf...oh no, we have a v courageous German member....
But, although it is unlikely to apply to me, what does 3 poems mean? 3 in succession? What if a person has commented, then posts 3 poems?
it means, stop being selfish bastards and post elsewhere other than your own thread. we don't even ask them to post feedback. a post in a discussion forum, or the sewer etc. after the three poem post thing they'll get a chance to post again as long they comply, we will assimilate
for instance, we have a few newbs on the site who are posting everywhere, not just on their own poems, we'll take care not to screw participating members over because they're having a reply rest
though this isn't my idea, i totally agree with it. new people see that they don't have to leave replies and think it's home from fucking home, depending where they've just left
the funny thing is a member in good standing is standing up and taking part in this thread. but not one of the poets who doesn't join in, will. well maybe they will now i've said that but you get what i mean i hope
we've amended to procedure so people can post elsewhere while being unable to start threads in some forums.
Some people may still not be aware of the site requirements despite having them posted all over the place, or they may be aware and simply not think the requirements apply to them. We don't want to chase people away with this; we want them to stay and become active members who participate fully in the site. We're not suspending posting privileges, we're just stopping people from being able to start new threads in certain forums -- hopefully, they'll take this opportunity to explore other aspects of the site and realise that being part of a community like this is a great thing.
I think its fair to say all of this sounds a little more scary than it really is.
Anyone who tries to be a contributing member will not be punished- and I am not speaking for billy, Leanne or TPP when I say that I am just speaking from experience. These are nice folks and knowing them, they are only doing this because they feel they have to.
The staff is not looking for ways to get rid of people, or embarrass anyone but trying to find ways to help everyone understand that it is rude and selfish to only participate in your own threads.
(11-22-2012, 11:01 AM)Mark Wrote: [ -> ]I think its fair to say all of this sounds a little more scary than it really is.
Anyone who tries to be a contributing member will not be punished- and I am not speaking for billy, Leanne or TPP when I say that I am just speaking from experience. These are nice folks and knowing them, they are only doing this because they feel they have to.
The staff is not looking for ways to get rid of people, or embarrass anyone but trying to find ways to help everyone understand that it is rude and selfish to only participate in your own threads.
I understand the reasoning, and appreciate that it is you guys who do the hard yards, and can arrange things in whatever way suits. For what it is worth, I have rather liked the fairly laid-back attitude here, and wonder if this does not detract from that in a small way. Presumably, no-one else thinks, as I do, that the bad guys are all different people, with different reasons for behaving as they do, so that a proportion of them, one might think, are likely to be holding back because of a certain, reserve or timidity. My inclination would be to give people a lecture on the way in, and tell them they would have to read and give proper feedback, before they could post their first poem --and would be expected to continue to do so. I sense that that would ,as it were, break the ice: having once done the crit, they would find it easier to do the next time.
I have noticed that you yourself, Billy, attend to an enormous number of posts, and I see that it must be dispiriting to see your efforts so ill-rewarded. Perhaps the site is suffering from its own success!
(11-22-2012, 09:35 AM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]well said.
Please see my comment to Mark. He may be surprised to see me call him Billy!
omg, i feel so dirty now
in all honest i don't think it will change the laid back atmosphere. it's been said and that's it, it maybe brought up or discussed but it's more or less a storm in a t cup. if people who normally share like rose or cidermaid, we won't be hunting them down. from what i see, good members have a lot of posts put by for those rainy days they just wanna upload their poetry, that's the way it should be. and you have a good point about suffering from our own success. i'd like to think that we're now able to evolve and help those who help others, help themselves.
if they're too timid to post in other people's threads but not too timid to post poetry, they can post it in the for fun section where there are no restrictive practices
and let's be honest, though i can get a bit pissed off when people don't give feedback, it's not the reason i do it. i actually like this shit
i'd hate for it to turn into a vanity site though, where people only post in their own threads.
(11-22-2012, 03:22 PM)billy Wrote: [ -> ]i'd hate for it to turn into a vanity site though, where people only post in their own threads.
That's my main motivation, I admit. I've been on vanity sites before and I hate them -- and so do most of the people I like the best
does this mean we broke your cherry
No dear, you weren't the first
I am moving this thread up again because despite most new members doing the right thing and posting more feedback than poems, there are some who are dangerously close to having their right to start new threads blocked for non-compliance.
This is a workshop, not a showcase. If you are not serious about participating fully, don't bother starting.
And to the people who think that one line of very short, generic praise on a poem for every poem of your own you post, think again. You're not fooling anyone.
It's not a vanity site if we're only fawning over one person. Which should be me.
Oh dearest, that goes without saying. After all, you have the dessert.
Not in the critique forums. Say you like it, and say why. In miscellaneous and for fun, you can say what you want, unless it is specified otherwise by the author.
(09-26-2013, 05:20 AM)Chrisko Wrote: [ -> ]Is it acceptable to make a comment such as "I really like this" if your intent is just to show appreciation for something you really do like, or are we only to reply to threads if we have critique to offer?
As newsclippings said, not in the critique forums. "I really like this" can be
part of your comment but it's so generic that there's no indication you've actually read the poem you're commenting on. People are pretty free with empty praise. If your comment says "I really like the way your poem explores the theme of camel-baiting in the Arctic circle using...",
that would be a specific comment and perfectly acceptable (as long as it's clear it's about that actual poem).
(09-26-2013, 05:18 AM)Leanne Wrote: [ -> ]Oh dearest, that goes without saying. After all, you are the dessert.
fix/d