So, my question is...how do you know you can post something for review. I've reviewed a few other pieces but I'm not sure they would qualify as "constructive critiques". I'm....well, almost afraid to put something up and be disciplined for not meeting the criteria. I've been on other boards that do not have this stipulation, and I find the policy here both good and bad. Good because it helps to get everyone involved with the reviewing process (givers instead of just takers), bad because I can't be lazy and just post something, get my feedback and go on my merry way....(which is kind of bad too huh?) Any thoughts
There are lots of suggestions on how to do a review. In general, though, no matter what you write as your review, if it is clear that you made an effort to be constructive, you should be fine.
You could always ask if you've met the criteria. We don't bite; Cogito, Wreybies or I (Well, unless I'm particularly hungry...)
Oh, come on Banzai, put Ann out of her misery. Let her know if she can post or not. She's clearly keen to throw her work at us!
Alas, not quite yet. She has one good review down, and if she gives another one like her last, I've no objection to her posting a piece for review.
The Review Room is a critiquing workshop. Like any workshop, making mistakes is part of the process. If your thread gets closed down, it means you haven't quite mastered the critiquing mindset that the workshop is based on. That mindset is a tool that eventually helps you self-critique, because you have to put into words: What should be changed. Where the problem occurs (and whether it is a single instance or a recurring issue) Why it is weak, incorrect, or ambiguous. How to change it. Why the change is an improvement. By addressing these points, you understand the change more objectively. It takes away a lot of the uncertainty and vagueness, so you can proceed with confidence. The mindset is also applied to receiviong critique, so it is a legitimate prerequisite to posting your own writing for critique. It's important to follow te critiquers' thought processes, in order to take emotion out of the equation. You need to be able to set aside the natural resistance to change what you worked so hard on.
