Writer's Corner - Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality.

[Martin Eden Mercury]

Thank you Mr. Longknife. I believe you'd be an asset if you decided to contribute. There is no quantity requirement for becoming an op-ed contributor. It may be there are misconceptions out there; misconceptions caused by the nature of the beast that is -- the USMB, wild west, show.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Where do you read 'writer's corner'? There isn't a forum named that.

View attachment 57004

US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Would be a good idea to view the entire web page from time to time. LOL Thanks.

 

[Wake]

The rub, for me, was being told that my beliefs are balanced and that I am a respectful writer, but was then told there were too many 'grammatical mistakes' for my submission to be considered. I'm not perfect, and no one is, but why ask for an independent writer who's good at conveying a balanced view, yet brush him off when he comes knocking? Not attacking or insulting anyone here; I just feel that something is wrong with the editing process, and in the process you're missing out on people who would otherwise offer something good at the table.

 

[saveliberty]

See Spot run, run Spot run...

 

[koshergrl]

The rub, for me, was being told that my beliefs are balanced and that I am a respectful writer, but was then told there were too many 'grammatical mistakes' for my submission to be considered. I'm not perfect, and no one is, but why ask for an independent writer who's good at conveying a balanced view, yet brush him off when he comes knocking? Not attacking or insulting anyone here; I just feel that something is wrong with the editing process, and in the process you're missing out on people who would otherwise offer something good at the table.

Trust me, they don't know what the fuck they're doing.

The one thing that editors should be able to do is fix your grammatical mistakes. That's the whole PURPOSE of being an editor.

They don't have the chops for editing. They want to, and they think they do, but they don't. An editor should have BETTER skills than you do, and none of these bozos does. You can see in the way they troll the site, they lack content, discipline, and they are definitely not up to the task of editing anything. And they know it, which is why they opted not to mess with your stuff..they know their limitations, regardless of their hubris. They're all smoke and no content.

I would have loved to see your writing. If you ever have anything that needs tightened up, send it to me, I'll edit it for you. Not for these idiots, but if you ever decide you want to submit something elsewhere.

 

[Arianrhod]

The one thing that editors should be able to do is fix your grammatical mistakes. That's the whole PURPOSE of being an editor.

That's actually the function of a copy editor.

Line editors and content editors have other functions.

Of course, a good writer makes few to no grammatical errors, and a conscientious writer proofs her own work before submitting it.

 

[asaratis]

USMB is not my first rodeo. Each time I change my home forum it's for an improvement that trumps all draw-backs. The degree of freedom of speech here is astounding. On a former hangout, name calling was prohibited to the extent of not being permitted to label someone a liberal or a conservative. Foul language and inflammatory remarks would get you banned...for life. (Of course, those so banned would come back under a new name and avatar, but it kept the place clean.)

Every now and then along would come a new member whose first post caught the attention of the upper crust elite of the board.

Board Elite: (You know them; those that run forum, those that suck up to those that run the forum, those that lead each political posture with a following flock of lesser parrots, those that are able to insult without appearing to have done so, ...most of which come from the seasoned, more intelligent posters.)

Well, along came Peeling. One post.

I and several others raced to the valid conclusion that this was the new alpha male and possibly the most intelligent person on the web.

He had a way of presenting his opinion on almost any topic without offending either side of a divided issue. His method of taking sides was to methodically, piece by piece, destroy an opponents argument with "if A, then B" logic and sequential steps from one stipulation to another.

His debates were the read of the day. The forum had one-on-one debate rules, a peanut gallery forum to discuss the ongoing debate and an open forum not near the size of USMB.



If you can find that man, you've got yourself a writer who is no egotist.

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

Thank you for some very honest input. I believe ck's original ideal, and one I still believe holds true, is for a diverse group of writers to form an op-ed forum. Starting up, quantity of content is not as important as a standard of quality. But just as importantly, we need a diversity of opinion on the forum for it to work over the long term. I try to think of it more as a Writer's Corner Forum, with a sub-forum of op-ed contributions. We all have an opportunity to share in the building out of this Writer's Corner. The op-ed forum is a start. Where it goes from here is up to us, the members of USMB. I've been holding back on a few ideas I'd like to throw out there. One involves a team approach for a Week in Review type of posting. I will open a new thread on this idea if I can get some serious interest. In that thread we could lay out things and take it to a Conversation/Message Group.

thank you all
Mem

 

[Tilly]

Thank you koshergrl, I see your negative attacks, and raise you a serious set of questions: Why are you so angry, and why did you bring that into this thread? Do you consider your first entry to be opinion or constructive criticism? Do you consider inflammatory and insulting attacks to be worthy of being called opinion? Maybe you could consider my set of questions to be rhetorical in nature, and somehow leave an empty reply?

Mem

Actually, you seem to be goading KG, and you don't appear to be going about this matter in a way that resembles professionalism. Why ask for feedback if you are then rude to posters who are giving you honest feedback?

 

[Tilly]

"I told them that their OP/ED column was going to go nowhere because they don't know what they're doing. You can see it with the moderators, and you can see it in this thread. And I was right." Sounds like Donald Trump here, insisting he tells the world about things before they even happen.

"Per usual, usmb set the rules, and then had no idea how to follow them."

I guess if I had the amount of contempt and disdain for USMB that koshergrl has, I'd be editorializing to myself - asking why I stay here. I'm not suggesting what she should do. I am wondering why she feels the need to attack the way she does. If I believed people were out to censure me, and steal my writings in order to take credit for them, I wonder if I'd even bother to post at all. Is koshergrl saying her posts aren't worth stealing, but her writings people will never see are?

I have to wonder if the rejection of her first submission (were there others?) wounded her so deeply, that she could not step back and resubmit a less inflammatory piece? Sounds very unprofessional to me. Very unprofessional for somebody with the pedigree she insists she possesses. We know how great a writer she claims to be. She insists on telling whomever will listen. This just might be one of USMB's greatest secrets. How is that for investigative reporting? Did I pass the 6th grade test? Do I get a scholarship to ITGFYU (I'm Too Good For You University)? I've discovered a hidden gem at USMB. One worthy of notice from the lookouts for Whizz's at the AP.

I know people who inhabit and thrive on message boards, are people who are attached to, and ultimately loyal to the practices of online engagement and involvement. The Writer's Corner is a good idea waiting to be exploited by a few writers out there.

I'll end with this: I'm glad this is not the Writer's Corner. The criteria for posting here is a bit different. I'm offering an opinion, not writing an op-ed or an editorial.

Mem

I didn't read that. You have one line to hook me, and you didn't.

Me too. Lol.

 

[Tilly]

Thank you Ms Gracie. I've been through a few threads here that are loaded with responses. Loaded with responses by a handful of people. If a thread is to be judged by volume alone, I guess inflammatory and insulting wins here. But the call for contributers was never a call for inflammatory threads posing as op-eds. Why is the concept so lost to some of us? Do people even know what an op-ed is? I wonder if people were to submit links to op-ed pages they consider well written for a wider audience, would those op-eds meet the simple standard laid out: an op-ed devoid of inflammatory and/or insulting language.

I may be mistaken, but I believe the original premise was that USMB could showcase some writers and itself to a wider audience, while attracting new people by having a type of op-ed page on the front end. What would inflammatory and insulting language get us? More of the same? Maybe more of nothing? Let us be honest. With more of the same we would hit that place of diminishing returns, if we haven't already.

For all it's worth, the op-ed section of the Writer's Corner is a start. What do some of you offer, but nay saying and negativity bordering on nastiness? What should be a simple discussion need not turn to the usual ugly back and forth of a typical message board thread. The writer's Corner is separate from the rest of the message board. There does not have to be one set of op-ed writers. It could be ever changing. It could be whatever the community would support as it evolves; but it appears lost on many people, that in order to get out in front of things, we have to start somewhere, and start somewhere we have.

Where do the perceptions of threats come from? Where did anyone suggest any particular person was to be kept out it all? And what political correctness are you referring to?

again, thank you

Mem

I'd like to suggest that your incredibly condescending manner isn't helping you.
Sorry if this 'opinion' is considered inflammatory.

 

[Tilly]

Thank you Ms. Gracie. I must say straight out that I seriously do not know what you are replying to. Did you read the thread op? What am I missing here? You appear to be arguing with yourself, because you just validated what it is that was posted in the op.

"We all know from experience that message boards come and go. But, my observations lead me to believe, that people who inhabit and thrive on message boards are people who are attached to, and ultimately loyal to the practices of online engagement and involvement. And what better engagement and involvement is there than to be an op-ed contributer - a writer? Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality will tell you that many people prefer to stay in the background, or to contribute in ways that do not demand much attention, dedication, and passion. Not everybody is, wants to, or even can be a writer. So cereal_killer's call in my opinion, was to the ego and vanity of a particular type of individual. Are you that individual? Because if you are, I ask you to review exactly what it was that ck was appealing to and asking for."

I do hope it is because of the late hour that this confusion has set in.

thank you again

Mem

Condescending.

 

[asaratis]

Thank you Ms. Gracie. I must say straight out that I seriously do not know what you are replying to. Did you read the thread op? What am I missing here? You appear to be arguing with yourself, because you just validated what it is that was posted in the op.

"We all know from experience that message boards come and go. But, my observations lead me to believe, that people who inhabit and thrive on message boards are people who are attached to, and ultimately loyal to the practices of online engagement and involvement. And what better engagement and involvement is there than to be an op-ed contributer - a writer? Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality will tell you that many people prefer to stay in the background, or to contribute in ways that do not demand much attention, dedication, and passion. Not everybody is, wants to, or even can be a writer. So cereal_killer's call in my opinion, was to the ego and vanity of a particular type of individual. Are you that individual? Because if you are, I ask you to review exactly what it was that ck was appealing to and asking for."

I do hope it is because of the late hour that this confusion has set in.

thank you again

Mem

Condescending.

Indeed.

Anybody can be a writer. There's a bell shaped curve for all groups...including writers. Some are good, a few are great, most are mediocre, many are bad and a few are pathetic failures.

Mem falls among the mediocre...a political shill with a condescending manner, convinced by delusion that all others should strive to achieve his self-proclaimed status.

BTW, the existence of an Op-Ed page (forum) implies that there is an editorial page (forum). Op-Ed means "opposite the editorial page". In most papers I read, the op-ed page offers opinionated writers a platform to publish opinions that oppose those of the staff editors whose bias is published on the editorial page.

 

[whitehall]

I'm pleased that the USMB actually critiques potential "essays". I was afraid that it would be just another venue for idiots to copy mostly left wing web site junk. I might consider an essay about my favorite love to hate modern hero, the original Old Soldier, General Doug MacArthur if it's O.K with the forum.

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

Writer's Corner - Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality.
"Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality will tell you that many people prefer to stay in the background, or to contribute in ways that do not demand much attention, dedication, and passion. Not everybody is, wants to, or even can be a writer." -Mem

"Mem falls among the mediocre...a political shill with a condescending manner, convinced by delusion that all others should strive to achieve his self-proclaimed status." -Asaratis

If I were a political shill it would be very interesting to know for whom, but even more interesting is the very disturbing idea that somebody could read this thread on a call for elitism, and somehow turn it into call for 'all others' to be more like me. What would be the point there?

The weirdly amusing sensation I get posting in this thread is one of delusion: delusion that I am somehow engaged in a replying back and forth with rational people. I wonder if the people replying in this thread are actually replying to what has been posted:

I am an op-ed contributer on the USMESSAGEBOARD.COM website. I take my role here, and the responsibility that comes with it very seriously. Two months ago, the Administrator cereal_killer put out a call for submissions for aspiring contributors. It is my opinion that as the process played out, it appears to have confused and soured some members on what was a pretty worthy goal. In my opinion, that goal was to empower members in reaching a wider audience, while increasing the visibility of USMB itself. USMB has members who have periodically wondered aloud how to attract flesh blood to the melting-pot that is USMB.

We all know from experience that message boards come and go. But, my observations lead me to believe, that people who inhabit and thrive on message boards are people who are attached to, and ultimately loyal to the practices of online engagement and involvement. And what better engagement and involvement is there than to be an op-ed contributer - a writer? Elitist for sure, but honesty and a cold hard look at reality will tell you that many people prefer to stay in the background, or to contribute in ways that do not demand much attention, dedication, and passion. Not everybody is, wants to, or even can be a writer. So cereal_killer's call in my opinion, was to the ego and vanity of a particular type of individual. Are you that individual? Because if you are, I ask you to review exactly what it was that ck was appealing to and asking for.

ck asked for writers who were up the challenge of writing an op-ed devoid of inflammatory and/or insulting language. I'm no innocent. I know most anything can and will be viewed as inflammatory by somebody out there; but there are agreed upon community standards in the public arena: a consensus if you will. If you or I were political operatives or candidates, I would hope we would want to be held to some sort of standard.

Now of course we all see people across the political spectrum, who violate those standards. They exist, and they are the exceptions that prove the rule. Interesting enough is the fact that because of our own partisan stances, we may even cheer or bemoan the violation at times. That's human nature, and the beast that is partisan politics. But I believe most all of us could agree; we would like to see some content and opinion that is neither inflammatory or wrapped up in insulting language meant to inflame. Having a writer's op-ed board that resembles the inflammatory content in most threads here, and taking those threads and giving them some sort of a higher privilege -- what would be the point? The Writer's Corner is a good idea waiting to be exploited by a few writers out there.

I believe ck wisely suggested aspiring contributors 'pick their favorite online rag, and check out their op-ed's, and get a taste' for what USMB is looking for. He also wrote that to "keep things balanced we will be looking for 3 or 6 writers in total. One or two from each party (Republican, Democrat and Libertarian/Independent). Yes Libertarian and Independent are two different parties, but in the spirit of this endeavor we will apply the KISS principle."

The search criteria as it evolved, expanded to seeking writers separate of any political party affiliation. It included an appeal for writers that could represent views across the ideological spectrum within America. Right now we have two writers on the op-ed team. We need a few more in order to flesh-out our team.

Opinions? Constructive criticisms?

Mem
​

or is this thread one where people with English as a second language are using a web based translator to read and reply? Is everyone here a native English language speaker? What am I missing?

in truly heartfelt condescension
Mem

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

The web has changed much in the way of how media gets presented. I come across op-ed columns on the web. The format is totally different than physical newspapers. Most op-ed pages in American newspapers have opposing views on the same page, or sometimes on different days. The op-ed pages do attempt a balanced offering. This is what I have been looking for with the format we have to work with. How that figures into Asaratis' odd statement that op-ed pages consist of 'opinions that oppose those of the staff editors whose bias is published on the editorial page' is difficult to comprehend. For better or worse, we live in the 21st century, digital world.

There are currently only two contributers. While I would love to stay independent, it is difficult to offer a balanced offering of opinions if the only other contributor is far along one end in the political spectrum. I do not pretend no bias, but bias is not ideology. Unlike decades ago, political polling today consists of looking for Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents, and the same on the Democratic side. Very few honest men and women would insist to be smack in the middle of any spectrum. To actually be there, would make one an aberration deserving a laboratory study. But to suggest I am a political shill is truly odd.

By posting in this thread outside of the Writer's Corner, I hope to debunk some of the nonsense that is floating around the forum. I guess like cats and old folks, some people here find any change not spiked with catnip or a fiber supplement, to be upsetting. Starting this thread I had no idea a reasonable call for input could take such a weird turn. But, I should have known. Shit happens.

Mem

 

[Martin Eden Mercury]

The web has changed much in the way of how media gets presented. I come across op-ed columns on the web. The format is totally different than physical newspapers. Most op-ed pages in American newspapers have opposing views on the same page, or sometimes on different days. The op-ed pages do attempt a balanced offering. This is what I have been looking for with the format we have to work with. How that figures into Asaratis' odd statement that op-ed pages consist of 'opinions that oppose those of the staff editors whose bias is published on the editorial page' is difficult to comprehend. For better or worse, we live in the 21st century, digital world.

There are currently only two contributers. While I would love to stay independent, it is difficult to offer a balanced offering of opinions if the only other contributor is far along one end in the political spectrum. I do not pretend no bias, but bias is not ideology. Unlike decades ago, political polling today consists of looking for Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents, and the same on the Democratic side. Very few honest men and women would insist to be smack in the middle of any spectrum. To actually be there, would make one an aberration deserving a laboratory study. But to suggest I am a political shill is truly odd.

By posting in this thread outside of the Writer's Corner, I hope to debunk some of the nonsense that is floating around the forum. I guess like cats and old folks, some people here find any change not spiked with catnip or a fiber supplement, to be upsetting. Starting this thread I had no idea a reasonable call for input could take such a weird turn. But, I should have known. Shit happens.

Mem

"Shit happens."

I wrote that three months ago. I have to wonder what opportunities people have passed up, simply because they cannot see beyond the trees.