Search options (Page 9 of 37)

Yes, you can make changes to your existing chapter, and you can change the designation to version 2, 3, 4, etc., as you go. I make changes every time I get a good suggestion (making sure I mark the review as "applied feedback"). That's how I keep up with reviews.

I don't bother to change the version number because, as Norm said, reviewers don't receive notification of edits, nor do they receive points for reviewing a second time material the computer views as still the same.

When I need a reviewer to check my rewrite for me (very rare), I send them a personal message asking for a favor, and they can answer my question in the other review format. But again, they won't receive points for a second review.

This works for me, but I've seen other writers submit their work a second or third time in the revised form, with the revised version renumbered. I often miss those, by mistakenly thinking I've already reviewed them.

So, the answer is whatever works for you is right!  JP

I've noticed it in a lot of posted works. I have no tech savvy, but could it be something in the writers' word processing/editing software? I use Word and edit by hand (never spellcheck). I've never had that formatting problem when I posted. Free advice--for what it's worth.  JP

I still say books are for the birds! (Too bad they can't read!)

You can't rely on one book. You can buy enough books to stock a library, but you still might not find that spark. Each writer needs something different, and a book is static; it can't conform to individual needs.  JP

I always post to multiple groups, some with points, some without. I only get charged once.  That multiple charge of which Jack speaks was rescinded a few months after the new site went up.  JP

Meet around the virtual fire, drink virtual eggnog, send congratulatory cases of virtual champagne to writers every time they publish another book?

Way to go, Denise! It's  been a long journey for you. Much success.  JP

My three favorites are Robert Louis Stevenson, Mark Twain and Charles Dickens. It would be impossible to copy their styles; the work of each was so specific to the author's own period, environment, and background. It is possible, however, to understand that they were paragons of writing who told a good story while capturing the life and language of the time about which they wrote.

There are many authors, past and present, who have done that. Those are my favorites--in part because I taught English to boys and girls who wouldn't sit still for authors of boring tales, and I wouldn't expect it of them. But the greater part of my admiration for those three comes from my love of reading their stories again and again.

We can emulate our favorites not by copying, but by being inspired to pursue the twin objectives of story and style, as they did.

For the record, Charles Dickens's misuse of punctuation is notorious. It's not grammar that makes a writer great; it's command of language.

I don't see anything with that title. Have you not posted it yet? Or maybe it was posted under another working title?  JP

Damn! I knew I should have studied more than the Romance languages. Nice catch, Lynne. Does that mean my reasoning was false? I hate self-doubt.  JP

Stormtrooper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stormtroopers were specialist soldiers of the German Army in World War I. In the last years of the war, Stoßtruppen ("shock troops" or "thrust troops") were trained to fight with "infiltration tactics", part of the Germans' new method of attack on enemy trenches.[1] Men trained in these methods were known in Germany as Sturmmann ("storm man", usually translated as "stormtrooper"), formed into companies of Sturmtruppen ("assault troops", more often and less exactly "storm troops"). The infiltration tactics of the stormtroopers are still in use today, in one form or another. Other armies have also used the term "assault troops", "shock troops" or fireteams for specialist soldiers who perform the infiltration tasks of stormtroopers.

(I know--more than anyone wants to know,but I wanted to share the historical perspective.) See? when talking about the organization,it's capitalized.

Just do it--however it feels right. I just finished reading a book in which the MC's eyes danced. If we were to take that literally, we might assume her eyeballs had parted company with her head. But we don't--we suspend our critical thinking and buy into it, if the writer has done his/ her job.

Can't be done.

Also, if a character's eyes are burning, it's probably from exposure to smoke or chemical fumes, and the only way another character would know about it is from their redness.

But it's become common usage, and no amount of wailing, gnashing of teeth or wringing of hands on our part can stop it now.