ext_3219 (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
crowdfunding2009-11-28 10:08 pm
ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com) wrote in crowdfunding2009-11-28 10:08 pm
Entry tags:
A Dis-Recommendation for Web Fiction Guide
I had reviewed a piece of weblit for Web Fiction Guide, whereat Chris P. pulled down the review because it mentioned cyberfunded creativity, which he considered an 'ad.' So if he is going to be hostile towards cyberfunded creativity, I'm not inclined to post there anymore, and I withdraw my previous recommendation for the site.
I am frustrated and disappointed by the general resistance to crowdfunded projects, as if there's something wrong with creative folks wanting to get paid for their hard work. It's clear that what we really need is a site to promote cyberfunded creativity in particular, with our own listing of projects and creators and donors, supporting resources, awards, and whatever else folks think would be useful. I really wish I had the programming skill to build something like that, but alas, I don't.
I am frustrated and disappointed by the general resistance to crowdfunded projects, as if there's something wrong with creative folks wanting to get paid for their hard work. It's clear that what we really need is a site to promote cyberfunded creativity in particular, with our own listing of projects and creators and donors, supporting resources, awards, and whatever else folks think would be useful. I really wish I had the programming skill to build something like that, but alas, I don't.
no subject
The people at weblit.us would especially enjoy further discussion of cyberfunding.
Hmm...
I'd rather not say. I don't want anyone snapping at the author.
>>It's basically to prevent people from going: "Hey this series was great, just like my series XYZ.<<
All I did was include a bit at the end of the review noting that this project in particular was cyberfunded and that cyberfunded creativity in general was a good way for people to support projects they enjoy.
To me, that's a legitimate part of a review for a project. If that's not welcome on Web Fiction Guide, then I don't care to post there anymore. They can do whatever they wish with their site, and I can choose to spend my time somewhere else.
Re: Hmm...
Amused
I posted a review and criticised the writers for creating what I considered to be fancy ad-copy; 'stories' with direct links to pages for hotels and restaurants IN the text.
The editors publicly denigrated my opinion and said to 'ignore me' (niiice...).
Therefore I find your situation amusing. I cannot imagine how much more hypocritical WFG could be.
I don't support them either. Which is a pity, because in theory, the site is a good idea.
Re: Amused
Ew. I don't think I'd like that. I have a fondness for amusing commercials on TV or at a theatre, but online ads almost universally annoy me.
>>The editors publicly denigrated my opinion and said to 'ignore me' (niiice...). <<
0_o That sounds bizarre. Thank you for sharing. Review etiquette ... is a delicate thing, not perceived the same by everyone.
>>I don't support them either. Which is a pity, because in theory, the site is a good idea.<<
Sadly, there are a lot of brilliant ideas ruined by flawed execution. On the bright side, cyberspace is vast, so there's always a chance for a better iteration.
I really do think that in this case, the best solution is for cyberfunded creativity to develop a site of its own. I am once again talking with someone who might be able to code such a thing; we'll see if it comes together this time.
Re: Amused
Re: Amused