Cherry picking

Yes, I think you'll find quid pro quo is the norm.

Cherry picking is inevitably a subjective art! I do most of it and the advice I give to myself as well as new editors is as follows: We are looking for improvement and excellence. If a writer has significantly improved then they should be awarded a cherry. If a story has a number of these factors: well written, wel constructed, has good characterisation, a fine use of dialogue and/or is innovative then it should gain a cherry. If a poem has: fine use of language, exceptional form, genuine heart, good shock value then it too should be cherried. You know as you read through the submissions what grabs you and what doesn't. But sometimes you feel more filled with largesse than at other times - and that is inevitable. We are also totally open to suggestions from members on what should be cherried. Any piece flagged up here with a high approval tag is always looked at with a more benevolent eye. We know that we are by manner of means the final arbiters of taste or fine writing so please please please help us to make it as democratic as possible.

www.lorrainemace.com But how on earth do you find the time to read all the submissions?

WELCOME TO THE STYLE COUNCIL MY DEARS 'Cherry picking is inevitably a subjective art! I do most of it and the advice I give to myself as well as new editors is as follows:' Blah, Blah. Then why do it? 'We know that we are by manner of means the final arbiters of taste or fine writing so please please please help us to make it as democratic as possible.' You should invest in windmills my friend. You have the business! Democracy: Three wolves and one lamb discussing what to have for dinner. Please, please get real! THE LONE GROOVER P.S. Do you also talk like that?

I've been wondering how the editors manage to read all the stories too. I count an average of about 14 a day for the last three days. At some point (hopefully before collective institutionalisation) I think the site's going to have to switch over to peer recommendation, as practised on flickr, youtube etc. But I'm pleased to see the first step to decentralisation has been taken: comments next to stories. All we need now is a way to tell if someone's left one. Probably the best solution would be a notification at the top of the 'my account' page if anything has happened since you last logged in. But I'm guessing that would be a bit tricky to program. An easy stopgap would be to put the number of comments beneath the story titles in the 'my accounts' page, the way are in the 'public gallery', 'recently added' etc. sections. Narcissists that we are, I think we'd notice if anything changed. BTW any progress on having the 'reads' counter only measure hits from people other than the author? The situation is even worse now we have to check stories to see if anyone has commented.

Kropotkin38: the reason more comments are left for poems is that more people can be bothered to read to the end of them.

I think once peer recommendation comes in, I will value my own cherries a little less. That said, I completely agree about the counter discounting the author's own visits. As someone who 'fiddles about' endlessly with his own work after posting it I am quite convinced 90% of my 'hits' are my own.

They are not all your own - I can assure you of that! Chris Whitley - we thought long and hard about cherry picking when we started the site and it has, inevitably, caused controversy from time to time but then controversy is the meat of discussion and we are always up for that. I've never pretended that it is an absolute art but it does help people and it does flag up the better work for the thousands of readers who come here. Lorraine - I make the time to keep on top of the submissions. I enjoy doing it. The only downside for me is that it stops me writing as much as I would like. I sincerely hope that we can continue to do so in some way or other. Kropotkin - I'm glad that your wife and I agree on the cherry thing - but if you spot a piece by someone else that isn't cherried and you think it deserves to be so then please just flag it up on here.

I think the cherry picks are perfectly consistent with the criteria tcook cites above. The pieces cherry picked are almost always at or near the MFA in creative writing level and are those more likely to be considered by other editors for publication. For those serious about getting conventionally published, I’d appreciate the free service and wouldn’t want to see it decentralized to peers because that does not mimic how the industry operates, it wouldn’t be helpful and is unlikely to result in the same consistency.

Yes, masters of fine art over here, various disciplines, the grad degree.

I agree - I want to keep it in hands of 'editors' - but also to keep flags and protests in the hands of the members!

I like the fact that the cherries correspond with the industry, i.e. not being democratic, and think the system works well as it is with readers/members being able to flag up work they think is deserving but with editors having final say. How many editors are there by the way?

I really don’t think it’s arbitrary. I think arbitrary and subjective is what you might end up with if only writers pick. The read counts and flags and ability to post whatevah you please is where the democracy happens. For parts picked by the editors, there are criteria and temperament and a pretty solid ear for what usually rings as “better fiction” in the post postmodern era, or whatever they are calling or will call this period. It does seem that ABC takes more chances than other sites; it’s a zero-censorship zone for one thing, which is getting rare, tolerating even (the horror) conservatism. I’ve been deleted and kindly asked to de-post various circuses of garbage from other sites. I hesitate to mention business at risk of causing many rolling eyes and extended middle fingers, but it’s a substantial investment to bring a writer to print, so there is a bar. Actually three bars. Make back the investment + a few percent + critical nods which boost longer term sales. If submitting pieces to publishers, I think cherry picks more or less reliably filter what the house is most likely to go for without feeling they will completely loose their asses. The internet has morphed the distribution channel and aesthetics has gone haywire so these days you actually get to see all this work that otherwise would never make it to print. Publishers will occasionally roll the dice and take their chances, but only up to a point and only in a good year. These are very strange times with art and business.

I must declare an interest before making any comment. I think the cherry system is a very good way of showing that other writers appreciate a piece of work and personally I confess that I love getting them! It's particularly good when you know the editors take so much care in their choices. It must take hours to read through all the posts and they can't all be so riveting, yet still they get read. I find it difficult to believe that a writer wouldn't be pleased to get some acknowldgement especially from his/her peers. Having said that I do feel that some facility to record an opinion should be provided for those readers who are not members of ABC. There are a lot of them if the 'read' figures are anything to go by and they seem to read an awful lot of posts. It would be fascinating to hear to what those readers think of our work and who knows it might just build even more readership.

They can always join up! I need members - but I also want to make the site as accessible as possible so it's a thin dividing line. My choice at present is to allow anyone to read material but if they wish to participate in any other way then they have to sign up - I don't think that's too harsh!

Firstly, let me say that I think the current system works very well, and is consistant. I usually know when I'm going to get a cherry, and when the work's going to get overlooked - and I usually agree! Secondly, I'm less sure about the supposed "unnamed masses" that read everything. Quite often (if I haven't signed on for a while) I find I've been signed off of the site. And unless I really, really feel the need to contribute to the forum or submit a piece of writing, I don't bother signing in. But I can still read as much as I like. Therefore, I don't think you can trust the reads that are from "non-members".

interesting....hows about a separately promoted 'readers account' - those who don't write/post, still sign up, and get to participate?