Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Help...I've been arrested by the grammar police Options · View
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:17:26 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
redhot363236 wrote:


My observation isn't so much a difference in grammar, as it is that the British use a more formal form of the language. There are, however differences in spelling and punctuation


I think we Americans use a somewhat bastardised form of English. What I call speaking American. I've been known to correct someones spelling in other forums. I'm no rocket scientist but I can spell pretty well.3some
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:18:43 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
To Liz and OWA,

Just after I posted my last remark I realized how rude it was and I changed it to be more polite. Unfortunately WWM had already quoted it and the two of you had already seen the original post. I apologize for my rudeness.

I will say again that a crappy story is a crappy story no matter how good the grammar is. The verifiers do help the writers make the stories more understandable but the verifiers do not make the story better. This is a fine distinction. I know I could rewrite any Shakespeare story and make it more easily understood but I know that wouldn't make it better.
sprite
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:19:22 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,548
Location: My Tower, United States
CleverFox wrote:
Do you think fixing technical errors makes the story better? I think it just fixes technical errors. A bad story sucks no matter how wonderful the grammar may be. All you are doing is making the story more easily understood.

Now if you (OWA and Liz) feel this makes a story better then you can feel free to pat yourselves on the back. But don't expect me to thank you for anything but helping me with the technical aspects.


umm... what's the point of writing a story if no one can understand it? actually, we don't expect any thanks. that's not why we do it. we DO expect some respect. i have lost count, this week alone, of how much abuse the mod team has taken. every thing from being called out in public blogs after bending over backwards to work with writers to being called "twats", "stupid", or worse in PMs. no one here is obligated to accept our help, just as we are not obligated to publish a substandard story. and yes, that's an official response. you can't be bothered to write an erotic story that doesn't meet the standards set by lush, it will not be published. period. if that sound bitchy and harsh, i'll be happy to open up my PM file and give you a tour of all the little love notes i receive after rejecting stories that are substandard, or blatantly break the rules. i don't have any problems working with people who want help. if you don't, that's fine as well.
Ruthie
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:22:12 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,154
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:
To Liz and OWA,

Just after I posted my last remark I realized how rude it was and I changed it to be more polite. Unfortunately WWM had already quoted it and the two of you had already seen the original post. I apologize for my rudeness.

I will say again that a crappy story is a crappy story no matter how good the grammar is. The verifiers do help the writers make the stories more understandable but the verifiers do not make the story better. This is a fine distinction. I know I could rewrite any Shakespeare story and make it more easily understood but I know that wouldn't make it better.


"When a man's verses cannot be understood, nor a man's good wit seconded with the forward child
Understanding, it strikes a man more dead than a great reckoning in a little room. Truly, I would
the gods had made thee poetical." Bill Shakespeare
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:33:44 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
CleverFox wrote:
To Liz and OWA,

Just after I posted my last remark I realized how rude it was and I changed it to be more polite. Unfortunately WWM had already quoted it and the two of you had already seen the original post. I apologize for my rudeness.

I will say again that a crappy story is a crappy story no matter how good the grammar is. The verifiers do help the writers make the stories more understandable but the verifiers do not make the story better. This is a fine distinction. I know I could rewrite any Shakespeare story and make it more easily understood but I know that wouldn't make it better.


We appreciate the apology.

A crappy story is even crappier with bad grammar.

Shakespeare is a classic, not exactly a good comparison.
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:39:10 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
Sprite, I understand and agree with what you are saying for the most part. If a story can't be understood then it really isn't a story. I am also sorry and do apologize for my rudeness, that was why I almost immediately changed that post but I wasn't fast enough.

I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors. I appreciate the help on the technical aspects of my story.

If I were to take somebody else's story that was flawed grammatically and rewrite that story would it be better? And I mean if I just fixed the spelling errors and punctuation but didn't really change the main thrust of the story.

I don't really think it would make the story better. The story would just be more easily understood.

I see OWA read what I said about Shakespeare and my point is that changing something won't necessarily make it better. How can anybody possibly make Shakespeare better? Of course if you read some of his plays he does have huge plot holes but it is the poetry that makes it great.

There was somebody that thought King Lear should have a happy ending to it and rewrote the ending. My Shakespeare professor read the rewrite to us. It was horrible.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:46:35 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
CleverFox wrote:
Sprite, I understand and agree with what you are saying for the most part. If a story can't be understood then it really isn't a story. I am also sorry and do apologize for my rudeness, that was why I almost immediately changed that post but I wasn't fast enough.

I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors. I appreciate the help on the technical aspects of my story.

If I were to take somebody else's story that was flawed grammatically and rewrite that story would it be better? And I mean if I just fixed the spelling errors and punctuation but didn't really change the main thrust of the story.

I don't really think it would make the story better. The story would just be more easily understood.

I see OWA read what I said about Shakespeare and my point is that changing something won't necessarily make it better. How can anybody possibly make Shakespeare better? Of course if you read some of his plays he does have huge plot holes but it is the poetry that makes it great.


And back to square one with the improving thing. I don't know what your issue is with verifiers. But a storie dat luks lyke dis iz anoyin to red and yes we do get stories that look like that.

As far as I recall, nobody tried to redo your story, only tried to help you fix it, if you don't want advice on how to fix your story, either don't send it with errors (proofreading helps), or don't send it in.
sprite
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:54:21 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,548
Location: My Tower, United States
CleverFox wrote:
Sprite, I understand and agree with what you are saying for the most part. If a story can't be understood then it really isn't a story. I am also sorry and do apologize for my rudeness, that was why I almost immediately changed that post but I wasn't fast enough.

I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors. I appreciate the help on the technical aspects of my story.

If I were to take somebody else's story that was flawed grammatically and rewrite that story would it be better? And I mean if I just fixed the spelling errors and punctuation but didn't really change the main thrust of the story.

I don't really think it would make the story better. The story would just be more easily understood.

I see OWA read what I said about Shakespeare and my point is that changing something won't necessarily make it better. How can anybody possibly make Shakespeare better? Of course if you read some of his plays he does have huge plot holes but it is the poetry that makes it great.

There was somebody that thought King Lear should have a happy ending to it and rewrote the ending. My Shakespeare professor read the rewrite to us. It was horrible.


a note: we do NOT rewrite stories nor ask that you do it. we simply ask that you use correct grammar - sometime that means rearranging a word or two - we will NEVER ask that you change a plot unless it's an issue with breaking the content guidelines, such as age issues, etc. trust me, we don't want to rewrite your story either - we have our own to write.
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:01:22 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


And back to square one with the improving thing. I don't know what your issue is with verifiers. But a storie dat luks lyke dis iz anoyin to red and yes we do get stories that look like that.

As far as I recall, nobody tried to redo your story, only tried to help you fix it, if you don't want advice on how to fix your story, either don't send it with errors (proofreading helps), or don't send it in.


Why did you bring up my story here? Isn't that personal? I have not said anything personal about anybody else.
sprite
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:06:30 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,548
Location: My Tower, United States
CleverFox wrote:


Why did you bring up my story here? Isn't that personal? I have not said anything personal about anybody else.


ahem...

Now if you (OWA and Liz) feel this makes a story better then you can feel free to pat yourselves on the back. But don't expect me to thank you for anything but helping me with the technical aspects.

After reading the replies from OWA and Liz I see the error of my ways and I now realize that none of the people that have posted stories here on Lush could possibly have teached their full potential with out the help of the verifiers.

We need the verifiers badly.

Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:07:54 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
CleverFox wrote:


Why did you bring up my story here? Isn't that personal? I have not said anything personal about anybody else.


You brought it up yourself:

"I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors."
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:16:59 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


You brought it up yourself:

"I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors."


I did not mention any specific person.
clum
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:17:25 PM

Rank: Clumeleon

Joined: 5/13/2011
Posts: 3,700
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Correct grammar and punctuation do not necessarily improve a storyline (although they can), but they undoubtedly improve the quality of a piece of writing, i.e., make a story better.

This whole fucking argument is semantics. The bottom line is, if you submit technically inaccurate stories, we'll do our best to help you to fix them. If you don't want our help, that's fine (we're plenty busy as it is), but don't expect us to verify your incomprehensible stories.

We don't expect a lot of thanks for what we do, but we certainly don't need to be taking shit from "writers" who don't know a comma splice from a coordinating conjunction.

The lion is most lionlike when he roars.
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:19:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
sprite wrote:


ahem...

Now if you (OWA and Liz) feel this makes a story better then you can feel free to pat yourselves on the back. But don't expect me to thank you for anything but helping me with the technical aspects.

After reading the replies from OWA and Liz I see the error of my ways and I now realize that none of the people that have posted stories here on Lush could possibly have teached their full potential with out the help of the verifiers.

We need the verifiers badly.



I edited that post almost immediately and apologized to OWA and Liz and OWA accepted my apology.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:20:12 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
CleverFox wrote:


I did not mention any specific person.


See sprite's post
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:23:09 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
clum wrote:
Correct grammar and punctuation do not necessarily improve a storyline (although they can), but they undoubtedly improve the quality of a piece of writing, i.e., make a story better.

This whole fucking argument is semantics. The bottom line is, if you submit technically inaccurate stories, we'll do our best to help you to fix them. If you don't want our help, that's fine (we're plenty busy as it is), but don't expect us to verify your incomprehensible stories.

We don't expect a lot of thanks for what we do, but we certainly don't need to be taking shit from "writers" who don't know a comma splice from a coordinating conjunction.


I will agree with you about the semantics Clum.
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:23:57 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


See sprite's post
. You accepted my apology OWA.
sprite
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:25:41 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 13,548
Location: My Tower, United States
CleverFox wrote:


I did not mention any specific person.


if you are really going to insist on being nit picky, yes, you did - see my above post, please. really, i'm just about out of patience here. by publishing on lush, you agreed to the rules. whether or not you like them or not, doesn't apply. some people don't like not being allowed to write stories involving underage participants. guess what. we don't allow that. we as simply asking that you do your best to follow basic grammar rules, the kind we were all taught by the time we graduated from HS. nothing fancy. just basic sentence structure. it's just that simple. i think most people will agree that i am normally very reasonable and pleasant and polite. that i have been pushed to this point, i hope, says a lot about what is going on here.

in closing, let me ask you this. do you really want a site where anyone can post a story without going thru a verifier? do you? because there are some out there and they are beyond awful.

ok, i'm done with this. it's giving me a headache now.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:25:49 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,067
CleverFox wrote:
. You accepted my apology OWA.


Yes I did, that does not mean I will automatically agree with everything else you post. You asked a question, she answered it, I'm starting to lose sight of the point of this thread now. As far as I can see, all issues have been addressed.
principessa
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:28:33 PM

Rank: Sophisticate

Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 3,859
Location: Canada
For the sake of clarity, story moderators are not literary critics. If they were, many stories would not be posted. We are here to insure that stories comply with the site's guidelines on issues such as underage sex. We are also here to maintain a standard of literacy that is an accepted norm and would be even more stringent if you were a published author. So, you are all free to write stories within the guidelines as you wish, however, these stories will be in literate English if they are to be posted on this site. The readers will decide what they like.

CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:29:16 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


Yes I did, that does not mean I will automatically agree with everything else you post.


You don't have to agree with me as I don't have to agree with you but at least when I made the mistake of making things personal I apologized.
CleverFox
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:31:17 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 463
Location: United States
Sorry to have given you a headache Sprite. I will post no more on this thread.
nicola
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 6:29:52 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 24,841
Location: Sydney, Australia
Amen.
Milik_Redman
Posted: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:50:44 PM

Rank: Internet Philosopher

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 3,669
Location: somewhere deep under the Earth, United States
CleverFox wrote:
Sprite, I understand and agree with what you are saying for the most part. If a story can't be understood then it really isn't a story. I am also sorry and do apologize for my rudeness, that was why I almost immediately changed that post but I wasn't fast enough.

I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors. I appreciate the help on the technical aspects of my story.

If I were to take somebody else's story that was flawed grammatically and rewrite that story would it be better? And I mean if I just fixed the spelling errors and punctuation but didn't really change the main thrust of the story.

I don't really think it would make the story better. The story would just be more easily understood.

I see OWA read what I said about Shakespeare and my point is that changing something won't necessarily make it better. How can anybody possibly make Shakespeare better? Of course if you read some of his plays he does have huge plot holes but it is the poetry that makes it great.

There was somebody that thought King Lear should have a happy ending to it and rewrote the ending. My Shakespeare professor read the rewrite to us. It was horrible.


I've never had the honor of verifying one of yours, but I can say that in general, when I edit a story it is not with the intention, belief or desire to improve it. It is so that it will be suitable to post under the terms of service of the site.

I have built my life's philosphy on the idea that nobody is so wise as to be able to tell another what is right for them. This includes matters of politics (and why I don't post in political forums) and matters of a more personal nature including art. I have as much respect for a person who believes that his story is artistically pure even if grammatically inaccurate as I do for those with a masters degree in English. That said, I will still reject a story that does not meet the criteria laid down by the site. I do this because I also respect the ownerships right to set limits.

So you see, if I reject you it isn't personal, it isn't about whether I think your story sucks or deserves an EP. It is only because you didn't follow the rules. It cannot be more simple than that.

β€œIt is a great thing to know your vices.”
― Marcus Tullius Cicero




http://www.lushstories.com/stories/cheating/a-trans-atlantic-affair.aspx
NathanDrake
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 12:08:55 AM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 1/15/2011
Posts: 15
Location: United States
I only got slightly annoyed by a rejection one time. At first it was sent back by sprite for a legit reason regarding subject matter guidelines, and I agreed with sprite and removed it from the story. The thing is, when I resubmitted it went to a different verifier who then rejected it for something different, something that apparently didn't bother sprite. It was borderline maybe, but I disagreed with the reason it was rejected, and also wished it went back to sprite because I never was satisfied with the changes I made.

It's not a big deal here, I was annoyed for about ten minutes. I understand that some of this stuff is borderline and comes down to a judgement call. I'm just posting for the sake of making a post.
paul_moadib
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:44:27 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/31/2013
Posts: 443
Location: Docking bay 94
Liz wrote:


I'm guilty as charged! Only a custodial sentence will do.
overmykneenow
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:55:34 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/8/2010
Posts: 961
Location: United Kingdom
The only time I've been irked by a verifiers edit was when one of them changed the proper spelling of "travelling" to the US corruption that is "traveling".

I'm more than aware that this is my problem, not theirs.

Warning: The opinions above are those of an anonymous individual on the internet. They are opinions, unless they're facts. They may be ill-informed, out of touch with reality or just plain stupid. They may contain traces of irony. If reading these opinions causes you to be become outraged or you start displaying the symptoms of outrage, stop reading them immediately. If symptoms persist, consult a psychiatrist.

Why not read some stories instead
Barrone
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 3:32:47 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/11/2013
Posts: 430
Location: United States
paul_moadib wrote:


I'm guilty as charged! Only a custodial sentence will do.
Oh Baby, arrest me already:)
Barrone
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 3:34:30 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/11/2013
Posts: 430
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


See sprite's post
Barrone
Posted: Thursday, May 30, 2013 3:35:55 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/11/2013
Posts: 430
Location: United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


You brought it up yourself:

"I do resent anybody that think he or she has made my story "better" by pointing out technical errors."
Hmmm....
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.