We've chatted in the past about the participation in critique rounds and the ratio of people-who-critique to people-who-don't. Here are some stats for you to chew on:
- 49 people critiqued during this round.
- The breakdown of the critiques is as follows:
- 28 - 1 (Thank you, Leah Petersen!)
- 24 - 1 (Thank you, sbibb!)
- 20 - 1 (Thank you, Michael Wulf!)
- 15 - 1 (Thank you, Barbara!)
- 14 - 2 (Thank you, MMChandler and Rebecca M!)
- 13 - 1 (Thank you, Anonymous!) (Grr.)
- 9 - 1 (Thank you, Jodi Meadows!)
- 8 - 1 (Thank you, Danielle La Paglia!)
- 7 - 4
- 6 - 5
- 5 - 7
- 4 - 8
- 3 - 3
- 2 - 2
- 1 - 11
- The total number of unique visitors during the peak critique days was 1,295.
- Which means that not-quite-4% of the total number of viewers over those 3 days actually left a critique. (And since several critiques continued to filter in over the weekend, the actual percentage is smaller than that.)
Taking into account the fact that it's perfectly okay for people to read our critique rounds without participating every single time, I am admittedly discouraged by such a low percentage of participants. What I haven't done (because, seriously, who has the time?) is to cross-reference the screen names of the critiques with the screen names of the 30 participants. Because, without taking the time to make a detailed comparison, I don't know how many of the 49 critters were participants in the round.
(Who, as you know, are politely requested to leave critique for a minimum of 5 other entries. In order to give back.)
Anyway, it's on the table now. What I really want to say is this: If you are not critiquing because you are afraid you have nothing positive to offer, please think again. Critiquing is a LEARNED SKILL. You will not learn how to do it--and learn to be confident in your ability--if you don't try. And I would hope that this blog, above all, would be a safe place for you to flex your critiquing muscles.
Anyway, it's on the table now. What I really want to say is this: If you are not critiquing because you are afraid you have nothing positive to offer, please think again. Critiquing is a LEARNED SKILL. You will not learn how to do it--and learn to be confident in your ability--if you don't try. And I would hope that this blog, above all, would be a safe place for you to flex your critiquing muscles.
The first manuscript I ever critiqued belonged to Jodi Meadows. TALK ABOUT SCARY. The gal was lightyears ahead of me in just about everything, and she had recently pulverized-I-mean-critiqued one of my manuscripts, which had left me feeling a bit "I Suck At This". But if I hadn't jumped in, offering my critique as though it mattered, I wouldn't have begun to grow my wings. I did have something to offer. It was a start, at any rate. And we all need a start.
Let MSFV be your starting place. A wing factory, as it were.
And, full disclosure: This critique round was peppered with at least 3 published authors and 2 of my beloved critique partners. And me. (If you received critique from "Just Me", that was me. I didn't play favorites; I chose 5 entries that had fewer critiques than some of the others.)
So there you have it -- dissection of a critique round! There were fewer entries, so it was a good time to do this.
Thanks again to everyone who participated! The quality of the critiques was high; I hope that the participants have found it helpful.
So there you have it -- dissection of a critique round! There were fewer entries, so it was a good time to do this.
Thanks again to everyone who participated! The quality of the critiques was high; I hope that the participants have found it helpful.
Love you guys! (Truly!)