You know, on the other hand, you're calling this person a troll.
I prefer to listen to what they have to say, especially if it means that I have a chance to make my future writing better in some way. (And I already have one concrete issue that I've remembered and passed on to the people that I've been working on my book with, so it's a net win for me.)
Please, anyone reading the parent comment: do not listen to grumpy gatekeepers like this person. Please write, and write as much as you want. It is I, as the reader, who will decide if I will read it. Nobody (except alanfranz and his peers, who you can ignore) will be bothered by you publishing something on your own blog.
It's someone who loves the sound of their own voice telling some poor person how clever he is and how poor her choices are when she is trying to do something difficult and the one objectively poor choice she has made is the fatal decision to ask the author's opinion.
I usually agree, but in this case maybe the author needs to hear exactly that. At least the author might the want to stop boasting about these things (and save his future career etc).
Why not comment on the (rather interesting IMO) content rather than on the personality of the person writing? No one is going to change their mind based on your snark.
> I just want to encourage better ways of writing, thinking, and publishing.
You could use more encouraging language. Phrases like "I don't care" and "[don't] have time for bullshit" make it seem exactly like you're trying to be negative.
I'm not trying to say anything, I just want to make you do better.
Always consider people who are different to you. Maybe they have so little time for bullshit they won't even bother being negative about someone else's writings from 8 years ago.
Not everyone writes with you in mind as their ideal reader. Some people write for themselves and publish to keep themselves honest, though I don't presume to know what OP's motives and goals are in this case.
Asking people for their opinion on anything (in my case, it's writing) is an art. Not everyone's opinion is worth listening to. If you throw it out to the general public, you'll get a lot of stupid ones. It's better to pick a few people you respect, who are not uncritical lovers of your work.
But you need to do that. As the creator, you have a blindness that it's impossible to get past all by yourself.
This is a good point. Maybe I missed the mark here. I'm not a writer, just a reader/appreciator so if my advice is bad from a writer's perspective then I hope the author ignores it altogether.
I find it rather interesting that someone wants to write publicly and can't deal with others disliking specific aspects of their writing. Not that the readers tell the writer they don't like it, but the fact itself that the readers don't like it and that they tell that to each other. I'm not sure someone this ill-equipped to deal with dissent should be on the Internet.
I don't think that's fair to the author. It's an ad hominem that shouldn't have any place whatsoever on HN.
At least this guy is out there sticking out his neck and taking a chance. I might disagree with what he has to say (I usually do), but I have no right to judge him either way and I think that neither do you.
Every serious writer wants a book deal. If he makes a "direction-less advice blog" to do it and manages to write decent stuff once in a while then more power to him.
What I'm trying to say is that argue with him on the basis of content and where he's wrong instead of taking pot shots at him. It's healthier and a saner way, because both of you might just learn something out of this.
> "You really shouldn't be writing, you should be reading"
So basically you are the type of person that caused the problem being discussed here.
There is a difference between someone making mistakes and someone feeling the need to point them out in public or private, or to judge who should be writing.
Maybe they should be reading more. But who are you or any other anonymous person to comment on that. If you don't have anything nice to say...
If the controversy were a byline then the writer would have a "taste for" pushing their point though and merely be riding the controversy to get there.
IMO writers often care about controversy because they make money based on engagement and get better responses if people are passionate about the subject. I don't think this harms their legitimacy as a writer it just provides a poor motive. Trolls on the other hand want to maximise engagement as it gives them a sort of sadistic pleasure, they do it for free.
Some people (lots of people) really are just bullshit artists, and it's a waste of time to consult with them personally when their thoughts are already out there, in the form of a published book.
Please explain how the internet is not populated a teeming mass of faceless opportunists, deliberately avoiding any and all efforts to be controlled. You are fucking wrong.
Your fragments in strike two are literally paragraphs apart, and ignore huge details that add context. But even so, there's nothing evil about asking someone you know personally, when they've openly told you they're going to write about you, if you can read it before it goes live. And very obviously, they're both professional writers, so it's actually a pretty collegial courtesy that acquaintances extend to one another. It doesn't grant him any undue influence over her creative process. Asking for that isn't wrong.
And nothing but MEH for your third strike against the guy. Both of you are entitled to your opinions, and I'm entitled to my opinion of your opinions.
Your classification of "sinister" is head-up-your-ass unfounded, sir. You deserve more downvotes.
I prefer to listen to what they have to say, especially if it means that I have a chance to make my future writing better in some way. (And I already have one concrete issue that I've remembered and passed on to the people that I've been working on my book with, so it's a net win for me.)
reply