Things you hate to see in an sffworld thread

[Irrelevant]

In response to a recent thread about things you hate to see in a fantasy novel, I decided to open up a discussion about things you hate to see in an sffworld thread.

In the "Things you hate to see in a fantasy novel" thread, people mentioned several things from cliches to book covers to weak heroes. While reading this thread someone mentioned "You should read George R.R. Martin's ASOIF."

I agree that bringing up Martin or Erikson is acceptable when talking to someone you know who's interested in fantasy but doesn't know what will blow him/her away. However, is there anyone who signed up to this forum that hasn't heard of these two authors? Both of them have their own forum!

Now I'm fine with someone mentioning Bakker (whom I've read) and Abercrombie (whom I haven't), cause some of us haven't heard of them yet. If they have their own sub-forum, just assume we've heard of them already.

Anytime I say, can you recommend a novel with such and such, someone always offers Martin or Erikson.

So what's your peeve people?

 

[Eventine]

I'm sick of the pissing wars between fanboys of authors
I'm sick of the "mutual exclusiveness" attitude around liking some authors (i.e. you can't like X if you like Y)
I'm sick of fans of "unpopular" authors being treated like morons or worse when they visit this site
I'm sick of topics comparing author X or some aspect of their work to everything else out there and the ensuing conversations which usually result in a mind numbingly intense level of vapidness, or on the flip side defensiveness or aggression.
I'm sick of responses to recommendations being the favourite author of the poster (or the last thing they read) rather than someting actually suitable to the request
I'm sick of everything being compared to Tolkien, and people acting like Tolkien is the be-all and end-all of fantasy
I'm sick of people who haven't read much within the genre making catch all statements about the genre.
I'm sick of people who post a single line in the "Reading in..." threads and don't offer any comment or opinion on the work.
I'm sick of people jumping into the book club, voting for a book and then either not contributing when it wins, or having the decency to try and read whatever beat them out.
I'm sick of people telling me I need to read up to book X in a series before it gets good.
I'm sick of people asking if something is worth reading rather than trying for themselves.
I'm sick of people acting like the fantasy genre consists only of big fat multi-volume epics.

I'm not saying I'm innocent of any of the above either...

 

[Ironhill]

Recommendations for the Name of the Wind and long replies to every question.

 

[Irrelevant]

Eventine mentions a lot! Probably covers most of the forum members complaints. If you agree with me or Eventine, then say "Aye!" Don't think you actually have to be original, just let your voice be heard.

 

[ChrisW]

I'm sick of the pissing wars between fanboys of authors

Oh come on! This place is already dull enough without taking that away from us

People sounding like there stating a fact or actually sating one when really it's just there opinion. Not that i'm saying you need to put "imo" after every statement.

Rob when he's closing a reccomendations thread.

A book review copied from a blog.

 

[Dayne]

I agree with a lot of the points mentioned by Eventine. Especially the pissing wars one, as I was about to say how much I hate when fans of a series get really personal and attack the people who criticize it.

I also hate Goodkind bashing. I'm not a fan of his books, but I really think that some people take it too far. Constructive criticism is good, but childish comments and mindless bashing is lame.

Thankfully, I don't see much of either of those things here at sffworld.

 

[ChrisW]

You must be blind. Even the mods make fun of Goodkind.

 

[Dayne]

Really? I guess I visit the wrong threads then. It's still lame though.

 

[Werthead]

I don't think there's much I 'hate' to see in an SFFWorld thread. It's occasionally puzzling when someone asks a question that Wikipedia or Google could have answered in about five seconds, but not a big deal.

A book review copied from a blog

* shrugs *

Much as I would like to write nine different reviews for the nine different forums I post to regularly, that's simply not practical.

 

[Rob B]

People starting threads about SUBJECT X when a (or sometimes more than 1) thread on SUBJECT X exists on the front page.

People who ask for recommendations, such as "I like authors x, y, and z, would I like authors a, b, and c" and they never return to the thread or the forums.

People starting threads when a little clicking (say to the 2nd page) will get them to the exact subject of a thread they started.

New members who don't even look around the forums before making a post. (This goes for ALL forums I visit, not just here at SFFWorld). Basically, get to know the community and what has been discussed before posting.

People who start a thread and are the second poster in the thread not even 12 hours later saying "What, no response?"

People who quote the entire post of the post just above them, i.e. Jack quotes all of post #5 when he is post #6 when he replies. / People who respond to posts with quotes of the post above theirs every time they reply to a thread.

People who submit more than two replies (for example, 3) minutes a part to respond to more than two posts (for example, 3).

People who start new threads asking if they'll like such-and-such an author, especially if the author is pretty established: David Gemmell, David Eddings, Terry Brooks, Terry Goodkind, Steven Erikson, George R. R. Martin, Robin Hobb, Michael Moorcock, etc. Those are older authors, the forums been around for a very long time. I say it all the time the SEARCH function is your friend!

New recommendation threads when three or four already exist on the front page. I've been pretty lenient in closing these of late.

LEET Speak

Excessive use of exclamation points!!! ESPECIALLY IN THREAD TITLES, OMG!!!

 

[Afrobro]

WoW are you psychic?

Recommendations for the Name of the Wind.

 

[Eventine]

Much as I would like to write nine different reviews for the nine different forums I post to regularly, that's simply not practical.

Did you happen to read the "Death of Dialogue" thread Wert? I think you've assumed the wrong root cause of the complaint.

 

[Ironhill]

Yes I am Psychic. My psychic powers tell me you play too much World of Warcraft Afrobro.

 

[Koitar]

Thing that bothers me is when people shorten book´s name. It is sometimes hard to know what book is "HoC". This is seen lot of Steven Erikson section.

 

[zorobnice]

I agree with ALL complaints below. Nothing pisses me off as much as a reader who thinks they have a better understanding of a book than anyone else, or that their opinion is the only one that counts.

I also hate having to be every careful about how you word things cos some folks just jump at you, and you have to write a second post to explain youur first one.

 

[KatG]

You know we do have a SFFWorld feedback forum, dudes.

That being said:

1) Long posts -- Yes, well, ahem. *cough* Okay, it's not all my fault. And when I don't do the cursed things, I get yelled at for not elaborating. But I'm sure all of us pedantic folk will try to do better.

2) Limited Recommendations – The SFF market is so large now, with millions of readers, that people often haven’t read enough to make wide recommendations. The ones that more people have heard of, are likely to have read and can easily find -- the bestsellers and category bestsellers -- are the ones that are going to come up the most for discussion and recommendations. This is a problem for all forums.

We’re looking at ways to offset this, but I really hope members will go ahead and do a thread for an author they like, because even if only two people show up for a brief discussion, it's a big help to the author and a big asset to the forums, in my book. And if you are curious about a book you haven’t read, right now we do have the What Can You Tell Me About thread, and sometimes you actually get answers on a title.

3) Review posts – We made the bloggers do reviews instead of links. But the complaint, Werthead, is not that you put up the reviews to alert us to books, which is a service. It's that you do it and then disappear. It makes it hard to start a conversation about the title or ask bloggers questions about their reviews. Bloggers don't always do this and do participate in other forum conversations, but it's happening frequently enough that it's making a lot of members annoyed. If they just wanted to read a review, there's a bunch of SFFWorld reviews on the main site page. The forums are for discussions, and particularly if it's an up-coming book that no one else has had much of a chance to see, the onus is on you as the original poster.

If that means nine different discussions on forums, well I'm not saying I know how you handle that. While we try to work out a way to be fair to everybody, again, members should feel free to discuss the title involved, even if you haven't read it, and no matter whether you agree or totally disagree with the review if you have read it, or if the reviewer participates in the conversation.

4) Extravagant, mistaken, inaccurate claims about fantasy fiction -- yeah, they drive me crazy too. Why do you think I'm always shoving historical context down your throats, or pointing out that publishers' release lists do not consist primarily of stories about orphan farmboys fighting Evil Overlords? It is also, I think, a sign of how large and exuberant the market has gotten -- leading to a great deal of confusion. Remember, nobody can make you discuss these topics. And if you feel the need to rant against them, just do it in a nice way and perhaps it will be cathartic.

Yes, I know it's a long, lectury post. But the system kept kicking me off yesterday, so it's not my fault.

 

[Werthead]

But the complaint, Werthead, is not that you put up the reviews to alert us to books, which is a service. It's that you do it and then disappear.

When I put up a review, I check it regularly to see what, if any, responses it generates. If it generates responses, I'll happily engage with them. If it doesn't, then I'm not going to spam the thread with additional points or 'bumps' until someone answers, as I believe that would not be appropriate either.

It makes it hard to start a conversation about the title or ask bloggers questions about their reviews. Bloggers don't always do this and do participate in other forum conversations, but it's happening frequently enough that it's making a lot of members annoyed. If they just wanted to read a review, there's a bunch of SFFWorld reviews on the main site page. The forums are for discussions, and particularly if it's an up-coming book that no one else has had much of a chance to see, the onus is on you as the original poster.

But the onus is to do what? If the post doesn't generate any replies, what is my response to that?

 

[Eventine]

Once again, the Death of Dialogue thread covers off the gripe in a bit more detail Werthead.
My feeling is that the review posts are very one way and don't work very well to foster discussion, and are quite likely to do the opposite. Take the current Sandman thread in the comics section as an example. Of course, this is only my opinion and I don't expect you to change your behaviour based on it. However, I'd appreciate if you think about what you're trying to achieve by posting the reviews, and if you think you're accomplishing that goal.

BTW, an edit to say that I think Wert makes some great posts and is a great contributor to the forums, I just don't feel that the reviews are as an effective contribution.

 

[Myshkin]

BTW, an edit to say that I think Wert makes some great posts and is a great contributor to the forums, I just don't feel that the reviews are as an effective contribution.

I've bought more than one book on the strength of Wert's "review posts". I'd say that makes them pretty effective in my book.

To the original question:

I hate when posters attack the arguer rather than the argument. It really pisses me off when I have to spend time defending myself rather than defending my points.

 

[Werthead]

Thanks for providing the link, as I had absolutely no idea what people were talking about when they mentioned it earlier.

Getting a good discussion going requires engagement by all sides. I see a review as the opening stage of that dialogue. If I don't get a response, I assume no-one is interesting in having that discussion and move on. The fact is that a given review could generate 0 replies on SFFWorld and then generate 3 replies on the blog proper, or might generate 10 replies on Chronicles or an entire 15-page thread on Westeros. If people feel that the reviews do not generate discussion, than that is puzzling because that is not the experience elsewhere. The Sandman reviews, for example, have generated considerably more discussion on Westeros and SFX, with people jumping in and talking about their favourite characters, what they felt the most successful story arc, whether Dream being such a stand-off and remote character was a good decision for Gaiman to take, the notion of each story arc having a male or female identity, and why Gaiman's prose work has skewed slightly more conservatively and less overtly fantastical than his comics work. All of that came from exactly the same reviews that were posted here. So I don't buy the explanation that the reviews are off-putting and don't generate discussion, because if so than it's only the people visiting SFFWorld who feel that way, particularly in that specific instance.

However, there is also the fact that my SFFWorld shortcut does take me straight to the Fantasy page and I have to remember to specifically check the SF and comics pages, which may be why I sometimes miss replies in those sections

I'm also going to say that a perennial problem of all reviews is that readers stick to what they know. A lot of the recent reviews have been about new authors and new books, and the replies I've gotten have been lukewarm at best, whilst the reviews of more popular 'cult' authors like Kearney (who has a small but vocal fanbase) or more popular overall authors like Erikson or GRRM generate a lot more discussion. There is also the problem that a fair number of people seem to want to discuss the book only once they've read it since then they have a common frame of reference. If the book was a pre-release ARC, then it may be months before such a discussion can take place. That is certainly a much bigger problem and one that is difficult to address.

Mind you, having said that, even the recent review of The Painted Man generated a lot more discussion in other locations, with people noting the lack of pre-publicity for what is a fine and marketable novel, whether it was necessary to change the title for the US release, the reopening of the 'fresh use of established tropes' can of worms and so on. Similarly, the review of Graceling, which I don't recall generating more than a couple of replies here, generated a lot more discussion elsewhere, mostly on the 'twee' aspects of the story and the spectacularly grating names (which fed into similar debates begun by the various Red Wolf Conspiracy reviews at the start of the year).

So maybe the only thing to conclude is that people on SFFWorld are less inclined to discuss these things than on other forums? I have absolutely no idea why that might be, mainly as it's something I didn't even think about until I wrote this reply.