Revision Process

[shemthepenman]

I believe the author is the authority as a bad person, a bad writer or an insane person. I believe that the author is always right no matter if anyone agrees with him. Only his fate resides in others.

---

You know the old saying, An artist should always go out on a limb whether there's a tree or not.

yes, i think we have an ideological difference of opinion. yours seems very conservative to me. each to their own.
however, the fact still remains that there will be no earth shattering rupture in the space-time continuum if one were to post an edit that one didn't necessarily agree with. and one might say, "yeah, but what's the point if i don't agree with it?" but this could be countered by, "well what's the point of posting poems on a website primarily geared towards improvement if, due to the high opinion you have of yourself and your poems, you literally have no intention of editing them?" what i am suggesting is, once you have made the decision to post and receive feedback, what's the harm in seeing it through, unrestrained by ego or preciousness or sentimentality? because, and i think you are old enough to appreciate this, no one cares.

i did have to think about the personality issue you raised before. and like i said, the personality of the poet is important. but, if someone has given a reasonable negative critique, then it should be an indication that the personality of the poet/poem isn't enough to save it from criticism. i often read poems on here that i really like and the personality/voice is unique and interesting. i don't critique these poems. i enjoy them. however, i read a terrible 'no one understands me' poem without spaces between the punctuation and all i see is the cliche of a poet trying to be unique and interesting. and so it is fair game.*

*this doesn't mean that i only critique terrible poems without a unique or interesting voice, or that i don't critique poems that i really like.