The summary as warning.

[burntcopper]

Oh, fic headers. may you ever reign as great big honking neon signs of 'DO NOT CLICK. YOU WILL REGRET IT. TRUST ME.'

Because, yeah, there's all those writers you only learn by dint of experience not to click on, because either you just didn't know how bad they could be, the ones who write subject matter you're never in the mood for, or you don't get on with their writing style (cs_whitewolf, who some love, I can see how they're technically good, but it's like Dickens. Cannot read), or some could be good, solid competent writers if they could reign in their impulses (laurab1, who has interesting ideas and the first bit's good if a little sugary but never knows when to stop), or some who are gradually learning and you've seen they've got better but write really interesting summary hooks so you always click, if a little trepidatiously (ru_salki99, getting better all the time but always that wee bit disappointed. and several phonetic spelling mistakes.).**

But, oh, headers. The lovely, lovely list of 'never, ever click'.

Spelling mistakes - When you can't get it right in the advert, we're not about to buy the product.
Not beta'd, with either couldn't be arsed or didn't have time - there is always time. and professional writers need editors.
Character names mispelled - do you even *watch* the show? (if it's a book fandom, even *worse*)
BDSM/Dark/Rape - there are very few writers I ever trust to get BDSM right. And considering yours truly is mostly a vanilla person, and if I can spot what's wrong? And dark is not what you think it is, sweetie. There is fic with not a damn ounce of blood spilt or bruising that is darker than you could ever hope to write. Rape? Never, ever a good idea.
OFC/OMC - We're reading fanfic, sweetheart. Not original.
OFC/OMC, Not A Mary Sue, Promise! - run away. even further.
'and they meet a strange girl' - Hello, Mary Sue, how nice to meet you!
high on pixie sticks! - take ownership of your own fic. It's not the sugar's fault. Admittance that you were drunk at the time, or 'er, I think I watched too much Blade Runner/Dynasty', is on the other hand a guarantee that it's probably amusing.
lol, giggle, excessive punctuation of any sort - oh hell no.
Please read and review! - we don't bother with beggars.
My first fic! - camouflage is much better. Don't try to pull the sympathy vote.
23/? - ...you don't know where it's going even by *now*?
user/author name contains 'spike' or is _insertnamehere_malfoy / the cool, 'edgy' character in a fandom - No, NO, UNDER NO BLOODY CIRCUMSTANCES. Especially to be used when said fandom's day is a wee bit passed. The only way you get me to click is if I know you from Adam.

Any I've missed?

**I know there's probably plenty of people who have issues with my writing, what little there is of it. If you want to tell me my faults, feel free - no-one ever really leaves 'good here, but you really need to work on this' feedback - I'm interested to know, and considering I'm quite used to my betas ripping my work to shreds, any critique is good critique as far as I'm concerned. I have a skin like a rhino.

ETA, 04/03 : ...I could've compared cs_whitewolf to Michelangelo, Scorcese, Hardy, the list goes on for people I can see are damn good at what they do but don't particularly like their style. OPINION. MINE. MY JOURNAL. And did you miss the bit where I said I *always read* the other two? I've left bouncy feedback on the fic of theirs I liked, and occasionally leave concrit. And yes, I do always use specific examples when citing anything, good or bad.

Comments

[celievamp.livejournal.com]

the killer for me is usually the dread words '... and hilarity ensues' or similar. AVOID.

[random-c.livejournal.com]

'high school'

[munchkinott.livejournal.com]

Meaningless ratings systems (e.g. wombat or pudge). Injoke, cliquey - GTFO!

Pointless warnings. Especially the stating the obvious award for stupidity in slash fiction warning: 'contains m/m (f/f)'

[flatlanddan.livejournal.com]

I'll admit to be slightly scared to click on fic written by people with numbers in their name...

[grondfic.livejournal.com]

23/? - ...you don't know where it's going even by *now*?

Actually I run from anything that says 1/99, and even further from 94/99 About 20's my absolute limit.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

no stamina. young people of today...

[lalumena.livejournal.com]

Oh grief, yes. Some headers and summaries make you want to run screaming in the opposite direction.
Never, ever venture over to ff.net. Because then you get treasures like:
SPOLIERS for 2x12-13, so don't read unless you have watched the final. SERIUSLY. King Richards magical ring of love takes Marian to the future instead of heaven. How will she deal? And what will Robin left to believe?
or
Robin Hood BBC Season 1/2 done as a Musical. Some things are different some are the same. Songs from different Musicals. (The sole chapter features High School Musical). Ack.
I'd definitely agree with you on the critique front. It's great when people enjoy what you've written but helpful to know where you can improve.
(Sorry about the random comment...)

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

I learnt v. early on in ff.net's career that one never ventures near the Pit of Voles if one can help it. and not even then. You may come away with scarring. And possibly some nasty unmentionable disaese.

[lalumena.livejournal.com]

Heh, pottersues scared me off that place well and truly. I did see last time I ventured over there (this is not a regular occurrence, I would like to stress) that some ok LJ ficwriters crosspost there. And there are some good non-LJ writers. But they're drops in a very murky ocean, as far as I can tell. ;)

Out of curiousity, how strictly do you adhere to your 'no beta, not going to read' rule? (Rule is possibly too strict a word here, but I can't think of another...)

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

If they say it in the header and it's longer than a drabble? No chance in hell. It's like a lot of the other header guidelines - if they actually admit to it in the header or wave it like it's a good thing, I make efficient use of the scrolling button. it's like the 'first fic' thing. I like new writers I haven;t seen before and normally click if their summary looks interesting. Actually *admitting*/making 'please excuse all my errors because I am a first time writer' noises means I don't click.

[miss-zedem.livejournal.com]

I agree with most of the points you make - headers frequently put me off reading, mostly for the reasons you say. I've developed a pretty good radar for when I'm going to end up reading a thirteen year old's fantasy, although sometimes I click the link anyway, and invariably end up going o_O

The only thing I don't agree with in this post in fact is the naming names at the beginning - I hope you left concrit on those writers' fics before denouncing them in public like that? If you don't like their stuff, fair enough. We all have people we avoid. But actually naming them in a rant about bad!fic? Bit harsh...

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

Ten years of reading fanfic, the filters become verrrrry specific, even if they're sometimes overly-guarded.

It's a write-up of a conversation I'd had in RL with some fen. Just examples - and yes, I do always name names in any context, good or bad, personal journal or comm-linked post. I read a lot of their fic, and leave feedback on a regular basis -and am fairly guilty of doing the not so much concrit as incoherent squee. I have the hide of a rhino and mostly forget other people don't.

Out of curiosity, where was this linked from? I wasn't aware any of my direct flist had linked it.

And a rant about spelling/grammar will always contain a spelling/grammar mistake *facepalm*

[miss-zedem.livejournal.com]

Can't remember tbh, I spotted it somewhere on my flist, and thought 'omg yes', cos I'd just been ranting at one of my betas via messenger about spelling mistakes in headers not exactly being an enticement...

I know what you mean about concrit - it's easier said than done. Unless I 'know' the writer well, I tend to either not comment (if it's bad), or flail incoherently (if it's good). The thing about naming names, yes, I see why you would do it in conversation, it was just the fact this was a public post. Like you say, not everyone has thick skin, and while I appreciate that the very act of posting fic in public invites comment, I just know I personally would rather someone contacted me if they had issues with my writing, rather than talking about me elsewhere.

*shrugs* Then again, I love it when people pull my stuff apart. I'd rather 'this was good, but you need to work on blah' than 'omg squee'. But after getting my fingers burned a few times by other writers, I've discovered I'm in the minority...

Re: And a rant about spelling/grammar will always contain a spelling/grammar mistake *facepalm*

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

:shrug: I've never, ever locked anything - but then I have no concept of privacy. and my betas have been known to actually point and laugh after pulling my writing to shreds.

[teresadivicenzo.livejournal.com]

Whilst I agree in great part with your general observations, I do wonder why you chose to focus on these three writers? I ask this because I think we all know that there are far worse examples of fanfic out there, and I would venture a guess that those are what you are pointing towards in your 'lovely, lovely list of 'never, ever click'.' I find it odd that you criticise one for being like Dickens and one for going on when they perhaps should have been more judicious in editing. I agree with the previous poster that I hope you left concrit for them along those lines explaining why you feel this way. Dickens is certainly not to my taste either, but he is to many people. It may be that the writing style of that author isn't to your particular taste, however, there is nothing inherently wrong with that piece of fiction. As far as a fic running on too long and the author not knowing how to rein themselves in, I would wonder if that's just a sign that improvement in editing is required as the criticism isn't directly related to the writing style or content. 'Getting better all the time' is also not exactly a description I'd relate to badfic, but rather a competent writer who is improving.

We all know badfic is out there and we all see dire examples at times. I'm a bit surprised that you chose these three authors and posted in this manner about them.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

:facepalm: ah, the fun of trying to explain rants - this was the writing up of a conversation I had off-line. The Dickens thing is an example of 'writers I can see are damn good but don't read because I don't like their style' (also see Michelangelo, Hardy, Scorcese).

And yes, I have left feedback on the other two when I liked their fic. laurab1, it's not so much a case of editing as 'if she'd stopped it at this point, it would have been enough, it's the fact that she tends to keep going a few parts too long'

:shrug: I always cite exact examples - they were just examples of fic writers I read, but know there will always be a caveat in the back of my mind.

ETA, out of curiosity, where was this post linked from? just curious more than anything since I didn't see any of my direct flist link it.

[teresadivicenzo.livejournal.com]

Ah, okay - I suspected that was what you meant with regards to the writers you mentioned, however, the fact that you then went straight into the general badfic criticisms without explaining what you have in this comment confused me.

I'm one of those odd creatures on LJ, I tend to mooch about and follow things via comms and individual LJs and see where they take me to random stuff. Your username has cropped up in a few comms I'm on and some of your flist are on some of my flists, so I just randomly ended up reading here. I've posted about badfic in various comms before and the entry interested me because of that.

[morgynleri]

*studies the post for a long moment*

First, you have an error in word usage in the paragraph naming names. It should be "rein in their impulses", not "reign in their impulses" - like using reins on a horse, not the reign of a monarch. Also, you misspelled misspell - two s's, not one - and I only caught it because my spell-checker caught it when I was typing this up.

Second, naming names is gauche, and horribly rude in what amounts to a third-party post. Talk to them directly, mention general problems with stories (and not just theirs), but don't do this. It's really not going to win you any brownie points.

Third, let's go down your list - some it I will agree with, some I will not.

1. Spelling errors - well, yes, I'll agree with that, if it's errors, not error. One is acceptable, and reasonable, more than that is forgetting spell-check.

2. Not beta'd - if you're posting without sending it to a beta reader, don't advertise it, and do your editing before you post it to a community or archive. It's more the mention of lack-of-beta, I would hope, that's the problem here?

3. Character names misspelled - or place names, or other words specific to canon. If it's a show, and there's more than one acceptable spelling of the name, I can grit my teeth and read it, and then leave con-crit with links for researching canon-appropriate spellings. If the author won't learn, then I avoid.

4. BDSM/Dark/Rape - see below, this needs separated out.

4a. BDSM - Know the author before-hand, or the person recommending the story. Otherwise, I'm leery, because, as you said, it can be difficult to pull off. On the other hand, I know some authors who can pull it off, and damned well, at that. I'll read them. And recommend their stories. And if someone doesn't know me, I don't expect them to necessarily listen to me on that.

4b. Dark - It's too broad a category/warning. Like "general". It gives no actual idea what's there. I tend to ignore it, and base my thought on clicking on more specific stuff.

4c. Rape - This is a subject that has to be treated carefully and well-written, and preferably non-graphic (for me; I won't speak to the opinions/reactions of others). And there's as much emotional to it as there is physical, and it's the emotional that makes or breaks the story. But it can be done, and often the author will have a specific (one hopes!) reason for including it in the plot.

5. OFC/OMC - name them. In the summary, in the character listing, in the pairing listing. It's a fault I have to get over. And, I don't care if there's an original character, so long as it's well written. I know of a number of people who write/read fanfic with original characters. Just. I get worked up about this one, and it's a hot-button, and we'll leave it at that for now, yes?

6. Ditto #5. And don't say they're not a Mary Sue, because you'll convince people that they are, without giving the character a chance to speak for him/herself.

7. "and they meet a strange girl" - not automatically a Mary Sue. Often, yes, but not always. Though if that's about all the summary is, I might not click because the summary isn't enough to catch my attention. Different reason.

8. "high on pixie sticks!" - Um. I don't want to know what your state of mind was while writing it unless I'm your beta-reader, and need to know so I don't actually go "what the *expletive* were you thinking?"

9. lol, giggle, excessive punctuation - well, yeah. It is a distinct turn-off on a story for me, as well.

*continued in reply, as this is too long to post as one*

[morgynleri]

10. Please read and review! - I actually tend to ignore this, and base on other things, like the summary and pairings and actual writing. Of course, the fact that I'm really bad at remembering to review specific stories, even of my favorite authors, might have something to do with that.

11. My first fic - depends on which "first" it is. First fic altogether - probably not, though if the summary is intriguing, I might. First fic in a fandom - depends on if I've (a) read the author in another fandom, and (b) how new I am to the fandom. If I'm new, I won't read the fics of someone else new to the fandom, though I may bookmark them for coming back to later, when I'm more settled. And probably will come back to them later.

12. 23/? - only if I know you. And most of my favorites don't run that long. With a couple exceptions, but they're worth the wait, and I'm fairly sure the question mark at that point is because they're not sure on the length of a chapter, and whether or not to split it into two chapters. Now, if I don't know the author... depends on how good the story is, and if it's not good, I probably have stopped reading twenty chapters earlier.

13. Um. Depends. I'll grant that some of my previous pennames involved characters names, but none of them particularly canon. And some authors with user-names with a canon connection can be good. If the summary is intriguing, and pairings or warnings don't turn me off, I'll still read it. Because the user-name may just be them not wanting to take the effort to change it - perhaps preferring to put the effort into their writing.

Fourth, I think I shall be checking out the writing of the authors you mentioned - I like Dickens and other classics, and someone who's improving needs encouragement, and I happen to be fond of the other author's writing, even though I'm rubbish at leaving reviews.

Fifth, you're welcome to argue with me, I love a good debate. Even if in the end the only agreement that can be had is that we're not going to agree.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

oh, lord, the explanation time...

(out of curiosity, where was this linked from? I don't tend to read past my normal comms and direct flist)

This was a write-up of an RL conversation. And we cited these people as prime examples of certain traits, including cs_whitewolf as someone the other people loved and I didn't, even though I could appreciate how good she was - Dickens is my usual example of 'authors I can appreciate that they're good, I just don't want to read them because I don't get on with their style'. ru_salki99 was someone two of us went 'example of someone who has fascinating summaries that make you want to click and we known we always cited her as not great in the past, but oh my god the one she's posted today? READ.' And yeah, I do leave feedback - mostly of the squee, occasionally of the concrit, but when I cite something I like to use specific examples and tend to auto-assume everyone else has a hide like mine, in daily life just as much as journal.

Re : the spelling mistakes. I'm a proofreader by trade. A very, very picky one. I just don't tend to fully proofread my journal entries, personal emails or IM conversations since they're not stuff I'm submitting for others' approval. Seriously. my entire dept is incapable of writing the word 'the' correctly in personal emails but can spot a mislaid tense from fifty feet away in others' work - hence why I always urge people to get a beta reader.

[morgynleri]

I've been following the replies, and I've noticed that you've mentioned it's from a real life conversation, so... yes, I can see how the names come up. It still makes me twitch, but I can see where it comes from.

The rein/reign one is a mistake I pick up very quickly (the things you end up getting stuck in your head growing up with historical re-enactment!), the other just pinged my awareness when the spell-check said I was spelling it wrong. *shrugs* Habit, even with my own personal writing, for reasons that get long and involved and TMI.

*chuckles* I tend to be rubbish at feedback because about all I can think of when I first finish reading is the squee, and I'd prefer to leave something a little more concrete - like what made me squee.

As for the link - I really shouldn't say, as the post in question is locked. And I'm quite probably over-protective. Though I'd mostly intended to come over, look and see what was the fuss, and ask why names were named.

The rest came from me getting a little verbose and happily inheriting my dad's tendency to poke at anything that looks like a potential hornets' nest, figuratively speaking. Possibly a character flaw, possibly a strength, most likely a little of both, depending on the situation. And I like to poke at arguments and see if I can't poke holes in them.

If I've been terribly rude, do let me know. For all my love of a good argument, I'd like not to be rude in the process, and sometimes even my own editing (which is why my replies for this sort of stuff take me a while) doesn't get it all.

[burntcopper.livejournal.com]

oh my. how much drama are we talking? And if it was any of the named people, I wonder if there's a way to get any of my clarifications back to said people.

...remember the rhino hide comparison? my entire family and circle of friends communicates via snarky comments and insults.

The 'MY OPINION' ETA was to try to prevent anyone else taking offence.

Plus, you're talking to someone who has been known to leave the comment of 'coherency is overrated. guh.'

[morgynleri]

Drama? Not particularly. Just confusion, and offers of hugs and chocolate, and like.

Oh, I understand snarky comments being the standard of communication, it's just... I'm wired to be protective bitch when one of "mine" is even a little hurt - and I can't say if she's a little hurt or a lot hurt or somewhere in between. Not enough data. So default is "mine, others don't get to hurt".

Silly, perhaps, in retrospect, but.. *shrugs* How I'm wired, and not likely to change.

As for clarification... I can let her know there's clarification, and such.

Eh. At this point, I'm more amused and engaged than offended. I think I stopped being actively offended about the time I told LJ to send me notifications for new comments to this. And stopped spoiling for an arguement (much) when I read your first response to a comment with the clarifcation that it was from a real life conversation.