I'm replying to this because I'm trying to figure out what you mean.
On first blush, this seems like a completely unnecessary reaction,
akin to "Oh, yeah?  Well, you suck!" from our playground days.  I'm
trying to give the benefit of the doubt in that I hardly think that's
the impression you meant to give.

Detailed explanation below.

At Monday, April 29, 2002 10:02:31 AM, nightelf@thekeep.org wrote:

the author from occurring and can avoid messy arguments.  However, in
this case you gave private and public negative C&C, effectively giving 
your argument in private to shield it from skewering and then turning 
around trashing a work in public without reason.  In this case, you're 
saying, "I have this great argument as to what's wrong with this work, 
but I'm not going to give it to anyone because I think someone will 
shoot it down."

  ???

  I personally fail to see the logic in that statement.  If DB gave
  criticism in private that's different that what was given here, then
  your statements above would make sense.  In that case, my argument
  is withdrawn.

  If not, though, then I fail to see how someone replying to both the
  list and to the author with negative criticism can be said to be
  doing anything resembling what you claim was done, above.

You tried to shield yourself, keeping your own skin ahead of mine and 
any other author.  In other words, your words are the antithesis of 
everything that critiquing is supposed to be.  If you give permission 
for me to respond to your private argument in the public domain of this 
FFML, I will consider them and respond to them within the realm of 
honorable debate; however, until then, I can only consider them as the 
cowardly ramblings of someone unprepared to defend his own words.

  This hints at a private message that we have not seen.  If that is
  so, would it not have been better to make your reply private, as
  well?

  Let me put it this way: I liked your piece.  I tend to agree --
  though not fully -- with DB Sommer that there was some unnecessary
  villainization, but it works within the confines of the story.  As
  was stated, removing the relevant portions of the text would have no
  effect on the story itself, as well, since the character in
  question -- if I am indeed thinking of the correct one -- only makes
  that one appearance.  If I had given C&C on it, I would likely have
  said something along the same lines, though perhaps not quite so
  bluntly.

  Be that as it may, I still feel that your response was out of line.
  Whether positive or negative, C&C is still C&C.  It's something that
  is both precious and rare.  If you don't like what someone has to
  say, you don't have to agree with them and you of course don't have
  to change your story.  But effectively lambasting them in a public
  forum, when they did not do the same, is hardly good manners.

  As always, this is my own opinion and nobody else's.  I'm certainly
  willing to discuss it -- and for that matter, my opinion of your
  work, as well (highly recommended).
  

Brian Payne
sofaspud@sofaspud.org
Sofaspud's Couch - oh, NO.  Who let THEM in here?
http://www.sofaspud.org


             .---Anime/Manga Fanfiction Mailing List----.
             | Administrators - ffml-admins@anifics.com |
             | Unsubscribing - ffml-request@anifics.com |
             |     Put 'unsubscribe' in the subject     |
             `---- http://ffml.anifics.com/faq.txt -----'