All Things That Matter Press

Momento Mori · Jan 13, 2010

All Things That Matter Press:
We chose, after a couple of attempts to reach out to these people, not to continue to participate in their “chat” since it appeared to be degenerating into some pretty ridiculous commentary and sarcasm.

Good to know it had absolutely nothing to do with their refusal to answer questions about inaccurate claims about the publishing industry and non-industry terms in their contracts.

All Things That Matter Press:
It also appeared to be becoming a semantics war based on certain people preferring one word over another, or perhaps just not having a grasp of certain words at all.

"Net profit" was one such "semantic war" that they refused to explain or justify.

All Things That Matter Press:
Gee, what a shame these folks’ publishers don’t share corrections and editing suggestions with them.

Untrue. The concerns raised were about an editing service that was advertised though this press. That is not what commercial publishers need to do.

All Things That Matter Press:
ATTMP authors and/or authors submitting to us are prohibited from using the editing service listed on our website. It is absolutely not allowed, and that fact is clearly stated. That service is available for authors who, while not choosing to submit to us for whatever reason, such as their genre doesn’t fit with us, would like to have their book edited prior to submission to the publisher(s) of their choice. We, in fact, frequently refer those authors to other editing services, just in case their work turns out to be something we’d offer a contract on when it was complete, so as to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

Firstly there's the complete WTF-ery of advertising an editing service on your site and prohibiting your authors from using them. Secondly, there's a massive conflict of interest in any publisher referring a rejected author to an editing service.

All Things That Matter Press:
Well, to our way of thinking, “injurious” would encompass such things as, oh, say, one of our authors suddenly going off the deep end and becoming a mass murderer. That would be injurious to us. Of if one of us did the same, that would be injurious to the author (and to us, too). Or if one of our authors who had published under a pseudonym for personal reasons were to suddenly start receiving death threats, that would be injurious to him. Obviously, legal language in contracts is intentionally written a bit vaguely in order to encompass unforeseeable future contingencies. If our attorney had tried to list every conceivable possible “injurious” circumstance, the contract would be pretty long!

How can All That Matters Press reserve the right to determine what is injurious to an author's interests? That's incredibly presumptious. Speaking as a lawyer, it is entirely possible to define "injurious" to a set list of circumstances that the parties mutually agree on. If you decide to keep it vague, it's because you want to keep your options open and given the breadth of the contractual clause in question, it's not in an author's best interests.

All Things That Matter Press:
“I'd at the very least try to contact one of their authors to see how they have found their experience with the publisher, but ultimately, Allthingsthatmatterpress are not a tradition publisher, with no advance given, but inflated net royalties of 40%. Not uncommon in publishing, in fact, more and more LARGE publishing presses are no longer offering authors upfront advances. HarperCollins set up HarperStudios with this model of author/publisher contract.” (Emphasis added.)

Which LARGE publishing presses would that be? Most commercial publishers are still offering advances of some sort.

Vis HarperStudios, it's somewhat misleading to equate that model with what All Things That Matter is doing. For starters, HarperStudios offer an equal split of royalties with its authors - 50/50 and on cover price NOT net profit. HarperStudios also offers a committed marketing budget to its authors, so there is a better than average chance of that 50% royalty actually translating into a worthwhile sum of money.

Most of all though, HarperStudios is committed to getting books into stores - something that All That Matters is quite open about not doing.

All Things That Matter Press:
The term “net profit” refers to the money paid on each sale after the printer takes their cut, because that’s the net profit . “Gross profit” would refer to the amount before the printing costs were taken out. We share the net profit, not the gross profit.

Commercial publishers pay royalties on the cover price, not net profit.

The whole problem with net profit is that there is no definition as to what those printing costs are. In practice, the definition could wipe out the amount of the profit. In any event, printing costs should be factored into the cover price.

All Things That Matter Press:
It is very difficult, as was been pointed out, for a poet to get his/her work published. While the market for poetry and short stories is limited, as, again, was pointed out, we don’t feel that that’s a reason not to publish quality poetry and short story collections.

Just don't expect to make any money out of it.

If you're a poet or a short story writer, you are better off going for journals and magazines that pay you for your work up front. At least that way, you can build up a legitimate name for yourself within the market.

Things That Matter Press:
We have extended the term of our contract to a five year period because the thought in the post was correct; it is difficult to build up sales in a short period of time. Good point, and thanks for it.

Without a proper marketing and distribution strategy in place, 1 year or 5 years - it makes little difference because the sales won't be there.

Things That Matter Press:
We’re not limiting our contract to “territories.” Sorry, c’est la vie. The contract is the contract is the contract.

Why? What difference does it make to Things That Matter Press? Any commercial publisher that takes whole world rights to a work, pays for that right.

This is merely a rights grab from a publisher that has no ability to sell in foreign territories.

Things That Matter Press:
We do copyright all of the books we publish, although the author has the option of doing so, as well, through the U.S. Copyright Office.

Why does an author need an option to copyright if you're already doing so?

Things That Matter Press:
Find me a publisher that doesn’t reserve the right to put a book on sale, please. That’s adjusting the price. And, no, our books are not priced higher than comparable sized books in the market. Go to Amazon.com and check it out.

It goes back to your use of net profits to determine the royalties payable. If you decrease the price, then your costs eat up a bigger proportion, leaving the author with a smaller slice of an already small wedge.

Things That Matter Press: (BOLDING MINE)
Of course books purchased at the author’s discount rate are ineligible for royalty. Please see Section VII (F) of the contract, where it clearly spells that out. See, this is our issue with this web site -- quite a few of the people posting don’t have a clue what they’re talking about!

Right back at you, babe.

Because ATTMP either doesn't understand or is being deliberately dense, the reason why this clause is important is because in practice, if there is no distribution in place to get books into stores (which is where most sales still take place), then authors typically find themselves having to buy their own books from the publisher to sell on to third parties. In that situation, under the ATTMP contract, the author would not earn royalties on those self-purchased books. Accordingly, any author seeking to make money will have to sell those books on at an increase to the cover price. In practice, that will make the books uncompetitive with others on the market, which could see the author lose money.

MM

Momento Mori · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous:
if Phil is right about one thing, it is that some of the posts here feel of the "guilty until proven innocent" variety

I think that there are particular red flags that come up again and again with regard to publishers and agents. Certainly those red flags came up with ATTMP. The reason people raise them is because they have historically proved to be a huge problem for writers.

Whether you like it or not, there are certain industry standard practices and terms and if a publisher or agent is either seeking to (a) deviate from the same or (b) claim that there has been a swing-shift away from standard practice, then that needs to be pointed out.

It would have been perfectly open for Phil to come here and explain the practices of ATTMP. Instead he chose to obfuscate, bluster and then flounce because he didn't like people pointing out where his company is, to be frank, spouting bullshit.

Mr. Anonymous:
it is easy to lose track of the fact that most of the people in this business are decent human beings.

It's not a matter of being a decent human being. It's a matter of being able to do what you are promising to do.

Bernie Madoff was a decent human being and look what happened to the people who trusted him.

Mr. Anonymous:
The suspect publishers/agents often take offense, leave, and the conversation remains unresolved, the concerns, unaddressed. Case in point.

If a suspect publisher/agent leaves, that doesn't mean the discussion itself is valid. These discussion threads show up on Google. Anyone who is doing their research can see what's being said and make their own decision with more information than they'd have had just perusing that publisher's/agent's website.

Mr. Anonymous:
But there is a difference between politely asking questions and throwing out accusations. There is a difference between asking questions and launching an inquisition. There were a number of comments made that I would consider snide (directed at Phil) but when Phil is snide back we promptly jump down his throat for being snide. It's very easy to be bold on the internet. So maybe a good litmus test would be stopping to ask ourselves if we would say what we have typed to this person's face, in exactly the manner we have typed it. I'll be honest with you - I would not be able to do that for a lot of what's been said. Not because of the what, but rather the how.

I can't speak for anyone else, but the way I phrase my posts is the same as how I deal with people in person.

If someone is holding themselves out as being in a certain business, then they should expect scrutiny and tough questions.

Mr. Anonymous:
there are in fact agents and publishers out there who enter the business without any substantial experience/apprenticeship, beat the odds, and make it. Adam from Artists and Artisans (iirc) would be one example.

Of course there are agents and publishers who are exceptions to the rule. And those exceptions are few and far between.

Entering into a contract with an agent/publisher is done on a caveat emptor basis.

Mr. Anonymous:
To try to be a little more respectful. In real life, we look down on people who base their tones around how useful a person is to them. I don't see why this behavior is any more acceptable on the internet. A good intentioned person may very well be useless to you as a publisher if he has no experience in the field, but that is no excuse to not treat him with utmost respect as a human being.

Respect is earned. How much respect do you think someone shows if they set up a business that takes someone's manuscript for no money, doesn't put the distribution in place to make that manuscript a success and then only "pays" the author 40% royalties taken after costs have been deducted?

Mr. Anonymous:
what I'm seeing here is people sometimes forgetting they are not just dealing with "another bad/useless publisher" but rather a decent, good-intentioned, human being who came on here of his own accord in an attempt to engage us in dialogue.

What dialogue? He came to spout his sales spiel and flounced off once people started asking difficult questions.

Mr. Anonymous:
Writers can be businessmen, but they are always artists first and foremost (which is precisely why I don't buy it.) I try to base my tone - not on how "presentable" or "professional" someone comes across, but rather on his/her personality. Whether he/she seems like a nice person. And if he is, but he's unprofessional, okay then. I won't do business with him. But that doesn't mean my tone has to take a downturn

And that's your decision.

I make decisions based on what people do and what they say. Can the person I'm talking to deliver? It doesn't matter how nice they are to me or how polite.

Mr. Anonymous:
it never hurts to give our fellow human beings the benefit of the doubt

There are dozens and dozens and dozens of threads in this Forum filled with posters who gave publishers and agents with no track record of deliverability the benefit of the doubt and look where it got them.

Mr. Anonymous:
And while he did go and blog about the meanies at AW, he also included a link to this very thread. Which suggests to me that he feels an unbiased observer looking in would sympathize with him.

Well, he's blogging to the choir by complaining on his own website. You could choose to read that as his believing that an unbiased observer would sympathise with him. You could also view it as his attempt to get his satisfied customers, sorry, authors to come here and defend him.

Mr. Anonymous:
Would you defend a literary agent's right to write a snarky, snide, sarcastic etc rejection to a query/manuscript? Because that's what you're justifying with regards to Phil and any other deemed an amateur. To them, their companies are like books are to us. They are their babies, their creations. It is a very similar situation.

It's not similar at all.

Think about all the agents who don't write any rejection at all. You might not find that professional behaviour, but the fact is that their professionalism is determined by the number of books they've sold on behalf of clients.

Phil's professionalism is determined by the number of books he sells to third parties unconnected with an author. It's determined by his business plan.

As someone who wants to be a professional writer, my book is not and never has been my baby. It's my work. I put it out there in the hope that it is good enough to be published and because it's my work, I expect it to be treated as something intended to be sold and if it's not of a quality that someone in the business believes can be sold, then I'll get on with another manuscript.

Similarly, I don't know anyone who is seriously in business who treats their company like a baby. It is something that they are running to make a living and which will be adjusted to suit that need.

Mr. Anonymous:
The reason why I bother, when I could just as easily pretend that I never read this thread, is that it IRKS me on a very deep level.

Then in all seriousness, don't read it. There's an ignore button. No one should be forced to read something that they don't want to read.

Equally, no one should be told how they should phrase their posts because some people are offended by it.

Mr. Anonymous:
This obsession lwith categories leads to a fundamental unwillingness to look beyond them and treat one another as human beings first and foremost, and everything else second.

That's your philosophy and you're entitled to it.

My philosophy is that you don't promise something that you can't deliver and you speak as you find. I practice this in my posts.

MM

Giant Baby · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
If you need anything, we're happy to help.

That is all.

Not sure how to read this - first instinct is you're being slightly facetious and a tad patronizing, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say, thank you.

No, neither intentionally facetious nor patronizing (although I agree it reads that way- my apologies, I was tired and inarticulate).

I haven't see anything in what's been posted here to warrant singling out this publisher for defense, so it occurred to me that you might have some experience or connection with them.

A well-intentioned "publisher" can kill a book just as surely as a scammer if they don't know what they're doing. Whether or not someone is a decent human being isn't enough when it's your book on the line.

BenPanced · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
All I'm saying is that I have over 900 posts here, I'm coming up on my 2 year anniversary, and I wouldn't have stayed if I didn't think this was a lovely, intelligent community. And because of this, I hold you guys to higher standards. I know you're better than some of what I've seen here and in other threads. You can, of course, disagree with any/everything I said, and the truth is nothing I say will change anyone's mind/approach.

Again, I'm not seeing what you're talking about. Respecting our fellows here on AW can be done without mollycoddling and holding hands; it can be as simple as asking a point-blank question.

BenPanced - I'd really rather not start quoting posts and then rewriting them to illustrate how a change of tone can make a big difference. As I said, hard questions are good. But hard questions can be asked softly.

And they were. And they are. Are we supposed to phrase the answers to questions in such a way we're actually apologizing for the possibility that maybe, we just might be hurting peoples' feelings? Again, I've seen nothing but attempts to explain where he'd gone wrong and requests for follow-up information. He's the one who took a "well, I'm right and you're wrong" flounce.

And while he did go and blog about the meanies at AW, he also included a link to this very thread. Which suggests to me that he feels an unbiased observer looking in would sympathize with him.

Considering the majority of the people reading the blog are his authors/customers, I saw it more as rallying the troops.

veinglory · Jan 13, 2010

Publisher are "guilty until proven innocent", if that is a metaphor for "presumed to be a waste of time unless there is evidence they can actually sell books".

Richard White · Jan 13, 2010

veinglory said:
Publisher are "guilty until proven innocent", if that is a metaphor for "presumed to be a waste of time unless there is evidence they can actually sell books".

Sounds like my blog rant last night.

Mr. Anonymous · Jan 13, 2010

Giant Baby said:
No, neither intentionally facetious nor patronizing (although I agree it reads that way- my apologies, I was tired and inarticulate).

I haven't see anything in what's been posted here to warrant singling out this publisher for defense, so it occurred to me that you might have some experience or connection with them.

A well-intentioned "publisher" can kill a book just as surely as a scammer if they don't know what they're doing. Whether or not someone is a decent human being isn't enough when it's your book on the line.

Just wanted to respond to this.

No, I have no connection to the publisher, nor to Phil. Truth is, this goes beyond this specific thread and this specific publisher, to a lot of what I see here. It happens again and again. People make observations - decent, intelligent (if conservative) observations, caution fellow writers, the publisher/agent comes on to clear his name, he detects people are looking down on him/her in his/her posts, begins to respond in kind. And it degenerates. So I picked this as a little battleground (Truth is, what's seen here is certainly not the worst of it.) It probably won't happen again anytime soon.

And to respond to the objection about my literary agent analogy.

First, this part

Think about all the agents who don't write any rejection at all. You might not find that professional behaviour, but the fact is that their professionalism is determined by the number of books they've sold on behalf of clients.

Yes, but these literary agents state they only respond when interested on their websites. When the author submits, he knows what he's getting into. That is not unprofessional and that is not rude.

Anyway, the similarity, I've said, is that the "owner" is just as invested in his work (read as company) as we are in ours (read as books.)

The difference you point out admittedly holds some water as a paper argument. That writers are not placing the dreams/hopes of others in their hands.

However, this is a qualification of your original statement, which was the following:

We should treat people based on how professional they come across (and a writer who submits a subpar story with typos galore comes off as unprofessional.)

So even to qualify this statement, is to backtrack, and to admit you were not entirely correct.

But fine, okay, let's make the comparison more apt, shall we?

I go around, interview a bunch of ww2 vets, with the best of intentions of writing up their individual experiences into some kind of a collection for publication.

Yet, I'm a shit writer. What can I say? I can hardly string two words together. I can't write action, I can't write dialogue. Of course, like many a bad writer, I'm not actually conscious of the fact that I am bad.

So then, would rudeness be acceptable here? In a situation where the writer DOES have other peoples hopes and dreams at stake? People who may be nearing the end of their lives and find the idea that their experiences will live on in writing comforting to them? Does this situation then, warrant rudeness?

"Dear Joe,

We've all heard stories about WWII. Better stories. Toodles!"

You see, your argument does not hold under weight.

And they were. And they are. Are we supposed to phrase the answers to questions in such a way we're actually apologizing for the possibility that maybe, we just might be hurting peoples' feelings? Again, I've seen nothing but attempts to explain where he'd gone wrong and requests for follow-up information. He's the one who took a "well, I'm right and you're wrong" flounce.

All I'm saying is that people are coming in with a certain mentality that is seeping into the way they post.

A simple example of this would be jumping on Phil for requesting that manuscripts be error-free. If you saw this exact request on a traditional publishers/literary agent's site (and I personally have) you would not think twice. But in this thread it's being used as ammunition against him. Somehow that little remark makes people question, aloud, whether or not it is a straight pdf dump. That is a little unreasonable. I know if I were the publisher coming in to discuss my company and I read a post like that, it WOULD be offensive to me.

Since you're playing hard-to-get, I will write up some examples to illustrate my point.

---a site has both agenting and editing arms----

***Rude way**** I see what you've got going here. So you reject people, refer them to this "separate" service, and then make money off them that way. And that's how you stay afloat. Because obviously you can't make money like a real agent. You know. On commissions. Because that would mean actually SELLING to REAL publishing houses whose editors wouldn't give your sorry ass a first look, never mind a second one.

***tactful way*** Hi, your site seems to advertise two different services that could potentially present a conflict of interest. Can you comment on that please?

----lack of editing? typos on website ------

*****Rude way********

Dude, you can't even edit your own site or even your own posts here. You expect us to trust you with our books?

*****tactful way*****

Hi, I was just wondering if you could comment on the editing process at NAME Press. It would also be helpful to writers using this site to evaluate whether or not they should publish with NAME Press to hear what kind of experience your editing team has.

etc.

Momento Mori · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous, as civility apparently matters to you, it would be courteous to set out which posters you are addressing and which of their comments you are responding to. I'm assuming that the following is addressed to me:

Mr. Anonymous:
The difference you point out admittedly holds some water as a paper argument (get it, holding water, paper, lol.) That writers are not placing the dreams/hopes of others in their hands.

However, this is a qualification of your original statement, which was the following:

We should treat people based on how professional they come across.

So even to qualify this statement, is to backtrack, and to admit you were not entirely correct.

No, I did not backtrack in my original comment and I certainly do not believe that I was incorrect in what I said, which is that professionalism is determined by deeds backing up words.

The fact is (whether you like it or not), the professionalism of an agent is determined by the sales he or she has made, not by how lovely they are as a human being. Someone who is telling you what you want to hear in the nicest way possible is considerably less professional than someone who is gruff in their manner but can back that up with years of relevant industry experience.

Mr. Anonymous:
let's make the comparison more apt, shall we?

I go around, interview a bunch of ww2 vets, with the best of intentions of writing up their individual experiences into some kind of a collection for publication.

Yet, I'm a shit writer. What can I say? I can hardly string two words together. I can't write action, I can't write dialogue. Of course, like many a bad writer, I'm not actually conscious of the fact that I am bad.

So then, would rudeness be acceptable here? In a situation where the writer DOES have other peoples hopes and dreams at stake? People who may be nearing the end of their lives and find the idea that their experiences will live on in writing comforting to them? Does this situation then, warrant rudeness?

How is this a more apt comparison? I can't see how your example of collecting memoirs for a book has any bearing on how people raise concerns about publishers and agents on this Forum.

Mr. Anonymous:
A simple example of this would be jumping on Phil for requesting that manuscripts be error-free. If you saw this exact request on a traditional publishers/literary agent's site (and I personally have) you would not think twice. But in this thread it's being used as ammunition against him. Somehow that little remark makes people question, aloud, whether or not it is a straight pdf dump. That is a little unreasonable. I know if I were the publisher coming in to discuss my company and I read a post like that, it WOULD be offensive to me.

Firstly, you need to put that in context of the whole forest of other red flags on ATTMP's website.

Secondly, the point about typos is that commercial publishers don't make a point about correcting typos, spelling and grammar because manuscripts that are submitted with such errors are assumed to be unprofessional and rejected accordingly. In any event, editing is about more than typos, grammar et al - it's about pacing, narrative, dialogue and structure.

Thirdly, given that there was an advert for an editing service on ATTMP's website, the requirement about edited, polished manuscripts raised legitimate concerns about the possibilities for cross-referral - which from ATTMP's own website seems to happen for rejected manuscripts.

Mr. Anonymous:
Since you're playing hard-to-get, I will write up some examples to illustrate my point.

I've been here over 3 years and whether you use what you term "tactful" or "rude" phraseology, you hardly ever get answers to your questions full stop because 99% of the time these people don't know what they're talking about and don't like being called on it.

As a result, I choose to be direct and to the point. You can choose to ignore that or you can drop by and try applying your tact to see where it gets you. Either way, I see nothing in your posts that convinces me that your way is any better than mine.

MM

Marian Perera · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
I will wrap up my involvement in this thread

Oh, I guess not.

Mr said:
Anyway, the similarity, I've said, is that the "owner" is just as invested in his work (read as company) as we are in ours (read as books.)

Actually, you specifically used the terms "baby" and "creation". I'm not so wrapped up in my work that I consider it my baby and will throw a hissy fit if someone criticizes it in a manner that is not utmostly respectful.

We should treat people based on how professional they come across (and a writer who submits a subpar story with typos galore comes off as unprofessional.)

I'm curious - when at any point in all of this did anyone say, "This is how I treat people and therefore this is how we should treat people"?

It seems to me as though you're the only person trying to influence or pressure others into treating everyone as you want them to be treated.

We all have our own methods. If you want to treat everyone gently and kindly because they're all human beings, that's your call. But so far you have presented no reason why this should be the norm, or why this should be preferred to any other method.

I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your post, since it's irrelevant.

Mr. Anonymous · Jan 13, 2010

Yes Ben, that is what I meant. It was a bad joke. I apologize if it makes your teeth itch. I find brushing helps in these situations. xP

as civility apparently matters to you, it would be courteous to set out which posters you are addressing and which of their comments you are responding to. I'm assuming that the following is addressed to me:

The reason why I didn't was because I felt my entire post could be applied to both what you and queen of swords said. Also, I don't know the code for quoting off the top of my head but I do know the code for bold, which is why I sometimes use bold in lieu of quotes. Still, I apologize.

No, I did not backtrack in my original comment and I certainly do not believe that I was incorrect in what I said, which is that professionalism is determined by deeds backing up words.

Yes, and you (and queen of swords) implied it is okay to base tone on perceived professional. And to extend this argument, to be curt, snarky, and rude to people who are not deemed professional.

To go back and say, oh, but that is only applicable in cases where the person deemed professional has the hopes/dreams/etc of others in his hands is a revision of convenience of the original problematic statement, and to my mind, certainly qualifies as backtracking.

How is this a more apt comparison? I can't see how your example of collecting memoirs for a book has any bearing on how people raise concerns about publishers and agents on this Forum.

IIRC, this was more of a response to queen of swords than to you, though I feel it applies to you as well.

Basically, her majesty (no snarkiness intended) called me out on my literary agent analogy on the basis of what I mentioned above.

That the difference between a writer and a publisher is that a publisher has the dreams and hopes of other people at stake, and his unprofessionalism may cost them dearly. Thus, it is okay to be rude.

I gave you an example where a writer did, in a very real way, have the hopes/dreams of others pinned on him.

Firstly, you need to put that in context of the whole forest of other red flags on ATTMP's website/

Even then, I think the pdf dump was a hasty conclusion.

Secondly, the point about typos is that commercial publishers don't make a point about correcting typos, spelling and grammar because manuscripts that are submitted with such errors are assumed to be unprofessional and rejected accordingly. In any event, editing is about more than typos, grammar et al - it's about pacing, narrative, dialogue and structure.

Oh, but I have read sites, where they DO make a point of this. So there.

Thirdly, given that there was an advert for an editing service on ATTMP's website, the requirement about edited, polished manuscripts raised legitimate concerns about the possibilities for cross-referral - which from ATTMP's own website seems to happen for rejected manuscripts.

Yes, well, logically, if they wanted to refer people to their paid editing service then why would they encourage manuscripts to be well edited before submission? Doesn't that take away their rationale for referring the submitter to an editor?

I've been here over 3 years and whether you use what you term "tactful" or "rude" phraseology, you hardly ever get answers to your questions full stop because 99% of the time these people don't know what they're talking about and don't like being called on it.

Fair enough. But if I were in their shoes, I would be more willing to stay and answer and maybe even learn if I felt the people inquiring about my business were doing so in a respectful manner, as opposed to launching a witch-hunt...

My queen -

Oh, I guess not.

What can I say? You folks are just too hard to resist.

Actually, you specifically used the terms "baby" and "creation". I'm not so wrapped up in my work that I consider it my baby and will throw a hissy fit if someone criticizes it in a manner that is not utmostly respectful.

You are correct. And I retract what I said. It was not the optimal way of getting my point across.

It seems to me as though you're the only person trying to influence or pressure others into treating everyone as you want them to be treated.

Everyone has a certain idea of how others should be treated, and it is of course, jarring to see others go against it. Obviously, we have certain norms established in this world. I cannot murder someone and then explain it away by saying, "bah, you treat people your way I treat people my way." And the norm I assumed we had in common was that we both believed that we should treat people as we would like to be treated. I am able to put myself in Phil's shoes and freely say that this is not how I would like to be treated in this kind of situation.

Marian Perera · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
Yes, and you (and queen of swords) implied it is okay to base tone on perceived professional. And to extend this argument, to be curt, snarky, and rude to people who are not deemed professional.

If one sees no difference between being rude and being blunt, I suppose one could end up with such a strawman argument.

That the difference between a writer and a publisher is that a publisher has the dreams and hopes of other people at stake, and his unprofessionalism may cost them dearly. Thus, it is okay to be rude.

I'm just curious - do you see nothing but rudeness in the way that this particular amateur press was addressed? I see questions phrased bluntly, perhaps with less than the utmost respect, but questions that were nonetheless valid. My pointing out typos probably helped Philip correct them, too.

So, for your analogy to be valid, the literary agent would still have to give the author of the anthology good information, just not in a manner than wrapped the author's "baby" in virtual cotton wool.

You are correct. And I retract what I said. It was not the optimal way of getting my point across.

Thank you.

Everyone has a certain idea of how others should be treated, and it is of course, jarring to see others go against it.

Then why not discuss it with the moderators? Put together a case for why this forum should be run as you want it to be run.

And the norm I assumed we had in common was that we both believed that we should treat people as we would like to be treated.

Absolutely.

The day I establish myself as a publisher, take the rights to people's hard work, put together a website with typos on it and charge for editing services, everyone here is free to treat me just as I've treated ATTMP.

I am able to put myself in Phil's shoes and freely say that this is not how I would like to be treated.

Then why not discuss it with the moderators? Tell them how you believe things should be done around here. Unless this is more of a grassroots effort?

Mr. Anonymous · Jan 13, 2010

If one sees no difference between being rude and being blunt, I suppose one could end up with such a strawman argument.

I don't want to start posting actual responses from this thread/other threads and pointing out why there is a certain lack of respect/scorn/rudeness evident in the phrasing of posts. That would not be nice and I'm not going to do it. But I think you know as well as I do that there is a fine line between what is blunt and what is rude, and that in such threads (and yes, even a bit in this one) it was crossed.

You brought this up earlier, and I failed to respond. That people might not respond with the utmost respect when I post something in SYW. But the fact is, for the most part, they do. That's one of the main reasons why I've stuck around. The first writers forum I joined was full of very smart, talented individuals. But they were also very blunt, sometimes bordering on what I'd consider rudeness. For a beginning writer, that was difficult to take, and still would be. I've found the atmosphere here much warmer, which is why I've stayed.

Maybe you and I DO have different perception of what is rude and what is blunt, but if I got a comment that said, "This sucks. Learn to write. And to spell. And don't post first drafts you effing noob," well, that would certainly qualify as more than a bit of both, to my mind.

do you see nothing but rudeness in the way that this particular amateur press was addressed?

Of course not. I tried to make a point of mentioning that not all the posts in this thread and threads like it were rude.

So, for your analogy to be valid, the literary agent would still have to give the author of the anthology good information, just not in a manner than wrapped the author's "baby" in virtual cotton wool.

Dear Joe,

"We've all heard a lot of WW2 stories. Better ones. Toodles!

P.S. Learn English grammar. Use a spell check. Read. Write another draft, then burn it. Repeat a dozen times. Then maybe try resubmitting. Just not to me please."

Then why not discuss it with the moderators? Put together a case for why this forum should be run as you want it to be run.

Because I'm not here to launch some silly internet coup-d'etat. Why should I go above your heads? If someone went above my head to a moderator over something I said, it would annoy me. Why not just talk to me about it?

The day I establish myself as a publisher, take the rights to people's hard work, put together a website with typos on it and charge for editing services, everyone here is free to treat me just as I've treated ATTMP.

But see, you're approaching this from the perspective of a jaded writer.

What if you establish yourself as a publisher with the very best of intentions, and believe that you have the ability to take peoples' hard work and get it into the hands of readers (whether you have the knowledge/experience is irrelevant, YOU believe YOU can do it), and put together a website that admittedly has typos that you overlooked and have not yet had a chance to correct because they seemed minor and you've been busy and caught up in life etc? And on top of that you offer an editing service that is separate from your publishing arm?

Anyway, I hope nothing I've said has caused any hard feelings to anyone.

Marian Perera · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
But I think you know as well as I do that there is a fine line between what is blunt and what is rude, and that in such threads (and yes, even a bit in this one) it was crossed.

No, actually, I don't know this. You seem to have a different idea of how amateur publishers should be treated - with the "utmost respect", for one thing - and therefore I don't agree that lines were crossed.

You brought this up earlier, and I failed to respond. That people might not respond with the utmost respect when I post something in SYW. But the fact is, for the most part, they do.

I find that in SYW people respond with kindness to the writer, but not necessarily to the work being posted. Similarly, I find that people in this forum are for the most part respectful of other people, but don't bend over backwards to treat claims, websites and companies' policies with deference.

Learn English grammar. Use a spell check. Read. Write another draft, then burn it. Repeat a dozen times. Then maybe try resubmitting. Just not to me please."

Good advice. Let's hope the writer takes it.

Because I'm not here to launch some silly internet coup-d'etat.

Then what are you here for? What do you believe you'll accomplish, and how are you going about accomplishing it?

Why should I go above your heads? If someone went above my head to a moderator over something I said, it would annoy me. Why not just talk to me about it?

You're missing the point. It's not about complaining to the moderators about something someone has said. It's about doing something about the problem that you see - and doing something that may be more productive than this dialogue.

If you feel that you know a better way in which to deal with amateur agents and presses, and if you would like everyone to at least consider adopting your method, why not approach the people in charge, rather than the small fry?

But see, you're approaching this from the perspective of a jaded writer.

As opposed to approaching it from the perspective of someone who sees only decent, kind and well-meaning human beings everywhere?

What if you establish yourself as a publisher with the very best of intentions

I seem to recall a proverb about what the road to hell is paved with. Have you ever heard that proverb?

and believe that you have the ability to take peoples' hard work and get it into the hands of readers (whether you have the knowledge/experience is irrelevant, YOU believe YOU can do it),

I believe I can fly,
I believe I can touch the sky...

and put together a website that admittedly has typos that you overlooked and have not yet had a chance to correct because they seemed minor

Yes, little minor things like that don't really matter. It's not as though anyone will notice them. And hey, if your editing service lets a few more typos slip by, you can always explain that you were busy and caught up in life, etc.

If I ever come across as such a clueless and irresponsible amateur, I hope that the good folk here will either shake sense into me, or warn away any newbies who might have been attracted by my je ne sais quoi, or both.

My species and personality are irrelevant to any of that.

Anyway, I hope nothing I've said has caused any hard feelings to anyone.

I don't think anyone here is so delicate.

eqb · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
What if you establish yourself as a publisher with the very best of intentions, and believe that you have the ability to take peoples' hard work and get it into the hands of readers (whether you have the knowledge/experience is irrelevant, YOU believe YOU can do it), and put together a website that admittedly has typos that you overlooked and have not yet had a chance to correct because they seemed minor and you've been busy and caught up in life etc? And on top of that you offer an editing service that is separate from your publishing arm?

If I did that, without knowing about publishing, with the risk of taking writer's work down with me, I should be pilloried for being such an idiot, however well-meaning.

The questions asked were standard. The concerns are those learned from years and years of dealing with other such well-meaning but gormless agents and publishers. Save your concern for the writers who have much more to lose.

roseangel · Jan 13, 2010

As a casual reader who is working towards improving my writing for publishing, I find I prefer the blunt and direct way posters question the publishers/agents/etc that come here.
See, they aren't coming here as 'decent human beings', they are coming here as representatives of a business, and they do need to prove themselves.
Being blunt and direct instead of candy-coating it leaves less wiggle room for these people.
I also do not find anything really rude about it, I see respect as something that needs earned as well.
I also think the mods would step in if they feel things are getting out of hand.

Unimportant · Jan 13, 2010

I agree that it behooves us to remain courteous -- flame wars don't accomplish much. But I consider publishers much in the same light as stock brokers. If I'm going to give them my manuscript (or my money) I want proof that they know what they're doing. "Nice, decent, sweet, caring person" is icing on the cake, but it's not necessary to the business at hand. I'd rather have the Harlan Ellison stockbroker triple my money than have the Mother Teresa stockbroker lose it all by donating it to a scam orphanage.

No one on BBC is asking if a publisher is a nice, sweet person. Because that's not relevant. We're asking if they know what they're doing. That's what relevant.

veinglory · Jan 13, 2010

[Having trouble imagining a "scam orphanage". 'These aren't babies, they're stray cats in bonnets!']

Unimportant · Jan 13, 2010

I was picturing poor little wittle baby Willem in a bonnet, with little wittle Miranda in a pinafore standing near his crib, and the poor little wittle hellocopter in the background, its fuel tank on empty.....

James D. Macdonald · Jan 13, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
Also, I don't know the code for quoting off the top of my head but I do know the code for bold, which is why I sometimes use bold in lieu of quotes.

The code for quoting is:

[ QUOTE ] ... [ /QUOTE ] (Without the spaces within the square brackets.) Or, you could highlight the material you wish to quote and use the "quote" icon that you see in the bar above any of the comment boxes. It's the icon that looks like a little comics word balloon.

Momento Mori said:
Bernie Madoff was a decent human being and look what happened to the people who trusted him.

Bernie Madoff was a con man, and is a convicted criminal. He came across as a decent human being, but he was a scammer, knew that he was a scammer, and kept on scamming anyway. I don't think he's a great example of a decent human being.

A better example might be the people who invested in the XFL.

priceless1 · Jan 14, 2010

Mr. Anonymous said:
it is easy to lose track of the fact that most of the people in this business are decent human beings.

Mr. Anon, what does being decent have to do with publishing? It certainly doesn't pay the bills or sell books. Obviously you want your publisher to be a nice guy, but more importantly, you want to know they can get your book properly edited and on the store shelves.

The suspect publishers/agents often take offense, leave, and the conversation remains unresolved, the concerns, unaddressed. Case in point.

I'd like to disagree with this because my own feet were held to the fire a number of years ago. Everyone asked me tough, intelligent questions that I happily answered. They pounded me for days, and well they should. After all, it's their literary career, and they should have as many facts as possible. Asking questions is how writers make intelligent decisions that will enhance their careers.

Any agent or publisher who goes on the defense and gets nasty tells me that they a) don't know what they're talking about or b) have something to hide. No one should ever take offense at being questioned. If they do, then they shouldn't come here because they'll get exposed post-haste.

In my opinion, All Things That Matter Press shot themselves in the foot. You do not eat your young in this business because you never know where your next big author, big deal, big acclaim can come from. They have made an enemy of AW and made themselves look like hackers.

JulieB · Jan 14, 2010

priceless1 said:
I'd like to disagree with this because my own feet were held to the fire a number of years ago. Everyone asked me tough, intelligent questions that I happily answered. they pounded me for days, and well they should. After all, it's their literary career, and they should have as many facts as possible. Asking questions is how writers make intelligent decisions that will enhance their careers.

(Added emphasis.)

priceless1 said:
Any agent or publisher who goes on the defense and gets nasty tells me that they a) don't know what they're talking about or b) have something to hide. No one should ever take offense at being questioned. If they do, then they shouldn't come here because they'll get exposed post-haste.

We grill 'em tougher than the cheese sandwiches the school cafeteria used to make. And you know what? I can understand how someone can be frustrated by what seems like a sudden burst of negative attention. Believe me, we're not doing it out of malice. We WANT to see new publishers succeed, but we also want to be sure that new publisher isn't going to vanish, taking the rights to our work with it. We've seen it happen time and time again, which is why we ask these tough questions. Please don't take it as a personal attack. See what priceless1 said above.

DeadlyAccurate · Jan 14, 2010

It can get tiring to see publishers start up making the same mistakes over and over again. That may make some people rather curt in pointing out those flaws, but that's not the same as being rude. And when the publisher comes in, guns blazing, and insisting we're all just a bunch of meanies, it always happens because they don't know what they're doing.

And quite frankly, who cares if this publisher has the best intentions in the entire world? Intentions don't run business; knowledge, experience, and a sound strategy do. If the publisher can't show they have any of those things, that needs to be brought to the surface without any prevarication. Could some people word their questions a little more diplomatically? Possibly, but why should they? A good business should be able to weather a fair amount of criticism thrown at it and respond appropriately. It's not up to us to coddle them and make sure we don't hurt their feelings.

If this had any chance of being a successful business, the publisher would've been able to answer the questions thrown its way.

Bushdoctor · Jan 14, 2010

priceless1 said:
Mr. Anon, what does being decent have to do with publishing? It certainly doesn't pay the bills or sell books. Obviously you want your publisher to be a nice guy, but more importantly, you want to know they can get your book properly edited and on the store shelves.

It is all well and good to say publishers are there to sell books etc but I still think that even in business we should remain civil. This is about how we conduct affairs with one another as human beings. Perhaps this publisher is the worst in the world, perhaps he couldn't edit to save his life, perhaps he can't sell a dozen books - fine I get it, but I am sure those things can still be pointed out in a civilized manner. Unless he is a scammer like PublishAmerica then I think he needs some constructive criticism. Why not tell him that his contract is not good for the writer and needs changing? Help him.

Maybe we need to remind each other why these small/micropresses exist. It is because there are more authors out there than the large publishers can ever have use for. For example just go on authonomy and see how many great manuscripts are sitting there, all unpublished. That's just one website. Not every author is going to be good enough to evern hit the midlist. That is why we have these micropresses out there, to fill that gap. Others who have great ambition will keep trying until they hit the big league and that is commendable.

Financial motivation might be a big thing but I believe that the real reason a writer writes is because they have a story to tell. If a good micropress can get 100, 50, 12 or even just one reader to read his story then they have rendered that author a service.

Richard White · Jan 14, 2010

Publishers do not exist to assist writers.

Publishers exist to get good books in front of readers. That's how publishers make money.

Publishers that cater to writers are amateurs or vanity presses.

Yes, we want publishers to treat writers correctly and to have contracts that are fair and equitable. BUT Publishers should be in the business of selling books to readers and they should know how to get good books, get them in front of readers, sell them and then funnel money back to themselves and the authors so the authors can afford to write more books.

But publishers are not there to "help authors get published".

Bushdoctor · Jan 14, 2010

Richard White said:
Publishers do not exist to assist writers.

Publishers exist to get good books in front of readers. That's how publishers make money.

Publishers that cater to writers are amateurs or vanity presses.

Yes, we want publishers to treat writers correctly and to have contracts that are fair and equitable. BUT Publishers should be in the business of selling books to readers and they should know how to get good books, get them in front of readers, sell them and then funnel money back to themselves and the authors so the authors can afford to write more books.

But publishers are not there to "help authors get published".

That's an excellent analysis Richard. Capitalism is great and we all love it, however not all publishers are going to be large scale. Just because Walmart/Tescos exist doesn't mean there is no room on the field for your local cornershop.

All Things That Matter Press

Tired and Disillusioned

Tired and Disillusioned

Oh, the humanity.

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)

volitare nequeo

Stealthy Plot Bunny Peddler

Just a guy with a pen & a delusion

Tired and Disillusioned

starting over

Just a guy with a pen & a delusion

starting over

Just a guy with a pen & a delusion

starting over

I write novels

Crazy Young Cat Lady

No COVID yet. Still masking.

volitare nequeo

No COVID yet. Still masking.

Your Genial Uncle

I grow my own catnip

Absolutely Fazed

Stealthy Plot Bunny Peddler