Search options (Page 30 of 32)

I have an iPad 2, also. I can't do in-line reviews with it. I click on a passage and no highlighting occurs.

Has Cobber become Sol, now? Or maybe he was always there, behind the scenes, manipulating the strings . . .

In "The Sincerest Form of Flattery" I had an FBI agent named Henry ("call me Hank") Henry. Yeah, it can be fun fooling around with names. The James Bond girls' handles, of course, were often tongue-in-cheek double entendres.

There are some authors who do not want to be bothered with nits, and an in-line review is an excellent vehicle for pointing those out. But it can be much more, including suggestions about chapter organization and character reactions/thoughts. In addition, a closing comment can incorporate anything one might say in a "regular" review, minus the nits. I like the in-line review, both giving and receiving. It saves me time to point out issues with the former, and facilitates manuscript correction with the latter. The author you referenced may not understand this and/or might not want writing errors pointed out. Either way, he should have explained that in his response.

I agree, but his horror was "thrilling."

She's more in the mystery category. Same applies to Cornwell, both Kellermans, and Lescroart. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Well, Dags, in the old days a doc had to rely on the PHYSICAL EXAMINATION to make a diagnosis. He didn't have MRIs and ultrasounds to help. I remember being a medical student rotating through Surgery when a senior resident pontificated, "The physical exam ain't worth the powder to blow it up." And that was a long time ago! In the old days, a surgeon, based on his findings and the medical history related by the patient, would hoist the kid onto the kitchen table, give some ether - if he had some - through a gauze mask, and take out the kid's appendix. "Memoirs of a Small-Town Surgeon" by John Brooks Wheeler (1935) makes for some fascinating reading. That small town was in Vermont, so I have some bias in that regard. I admire those old guys, the pioneers, who blazed the trail for future surgeons to follow. They knew their stuff! Sorry for the rant, but your post struck a chord with me.

Aw, c'mon, njc. Building walls? That's not what we're about. The purpose of groups is to gather like-minded writers together to share ideas, discuss issues related to the particular genres. At least that was my motivation for starting a group. Most of the time, though, the group just serves as the place to post a story appropriate for the genre. A place for those who like that kind of story to go to and find a story to their liking. How can it be clique-ish if anyone can join a specific group if they think it suits them? And join more than one group? We're a family of writers, each member trying to achieve a success that meets the individual's definition of it.  So have some fun and take advantage of the wealth of talent available here - in whatever group(s) meets your fancy. The paranoia you expressed is misplaced, in my view.