Interesting response to the idea of repetitive threads on the SP Screenwriters' List this morning:
Golly Gee Boys and Girls, oops Men and Women or is it Women and men? If you don't like what's written in the bulletin, you, with a tad of intelligence, can just, well maybe, it is possible you know, to use your brain and consider skipping the read. Many newbees to the site just might like the read, so shut up, pass onto the next note and so forth until you have digested your meal, had your third beer and be done with it. Grow up and let those who might like the read, READ.
Funny how this poster forgets I made the point last Friday I was already "skipping the read" much of the time. Maybe he skimmed last Friday's bulletin though, lol.
Or perhaps this guy just doesn't like MY posts: he responded with this below when I posted in the dialogue section a short while back about The Power of Three:
Now, I want to make certain I have this straight! When a writer finishes his/her screenplay, he/she needs to get as many as nine critiques? Excuse me, but that is the most stupid idea I have ever heard in my life except "Let's get married." Find a great reader, writer or person who knows the art form and rely on that person for feedback, PERIOD! I have such persons; a writer, a director, a producer. OOPS, that's the power of three! Except, I only let one of them critique depending on the genre, length and their time availability. If you, as a writer, cannot tell when a script is ready for the world, then go back to school and learn the craft! That my friends is the power of ONE!
Even working on the basis that this fella likes a internet-based ruck, I find it quite depressing that writers are expected to just "put up and shut up" with dialogue they find repetitive or whinging on SP. Whilst one poster said she felt £30 a year wasn't good value to be "patronised" by people like myself yesterday, it does cut both ways. If I'm paying £30 a year, I would like intelligent debate that doesn't repeat itself or indulge in the type of thing we can see above re: Po3. Alternatively I have no problem being left alone in peace to read the jobs, the ads, the announcements, etc without a load of clamouring voices insisting they're RIGHT, so wonder if another list FOR dialogue might be appropriate.
I found it suprising that Andy said yesterday that those who don't like the dialogue rarely contribute and are the "Haters", because this is simply not true in my eyes. Just because someone does not want to get into an argument does not make them a "Hater": the way I see it, they actually want to spread LESS hate. What's more people HAVE complained about the list directly TO the list, they're not back-biting. I am (or was) an active contributor to the list and so have other people who don't sit on the sidelines of this scriptwriting malarkey - we could contribute well, but have found ourselves brow-beaten or feeling world-weary about the responses we get. Is it any wonder then we've thought, "Sod it" and now look elsewhere on the 'net for dialogue, like on the blogs or Twelve Point?
Andy did mention yesterday too that he would be doing a "Best of" posts to try and avoid repetitive threads. I think this is a good idea, but wonder if it goes far enough when people will inevitably bleat about being censored because their new posts about old stuff will no longer get through? Chip and Potdoll made the excellent point in Friday's thread here the list each day should be about "business stuff" like the WGGB newsletter, with a forum or message board for those people who want the dialogue that would have otherwise been on the SP List. Hell, maybe the Screenwriters' Bulletin could come less frequently - quality, not quantity: three or even two times a week if content is low on collaborations, unpaid or paid work, plus Andy would no doubt get lumbered with responsibility for the forum, so he would need to re-order his time, it's only fair.
In the absence of the above, why not a "new members" area of the list itself where it's understood they can talk about whatever they want, as many times as they want, but older members can skip without any fear of missing anything? This wouldn't address the "vicious responses" Dave Herman talks about yesterday of course, but maybe that will never change.
What do you think?