Quick Note and Apology

March 17, 2011

Fred Hicks has mentioned that some folks were really annoyed at my rant about editing. If so, I apologize, since I didn’t meant to make people upset, just to question some of the new consensus that seemed to be building about editing in the aftermath of Ben’s anti-playtesting post on Anyway and some other discussions.

In truth, “editor-serving drivel” was completely unfair to the motivations of folks with different opinions. Really, we all want to help folks make games that they’re proud of. If anyone’s still upset and wants to talk about it or tell me I’m a jerk, feel free to whisper me or email me (jaywalt, gmail).

That was not the best example of the kind of voice I aspire to be and hope I can gradually re-earn any respect that I’ve lost.

9 Responses to “Quick Note and Apology”

  1. Ryan Macklin Says:

    There’s a new consensus because of Ben’s post? Man, that’s recent. Anyway.

    That was not the best example of the kind of voice I aspire to be and hope I can gradually re-earn any respect that I’ve lost.

    Most people don’t apologize on the Internet. So, from my perspective as “your co-editor on a project that was rather personally insulted,” we’re cool. I can’t speak for others, but I can for me.

    – Ryan

    • Shreyas Says:

      Jon, you really need to own your incendiary language man. Editor-serving drivel is editor-serving drivel, and if you don’t believe in it you’re entitled to say what you feel about it. Don’t let the fat man get you down.

      • Ryan Macklin Says:

        You are so fucking adorable, S. I just want to eat you up. 🙂

        – Ryan


      • Shreyas, what I meant to imply was something more like “when folks who are editors say editing is crucial to the indie publishing process, they might be giving you good advice, but you should also consider how their personal perspective might be influencing their views.”

        What I ended up implying is that editors were lying, self-serving jerks, which I don’t think is actually the case. Especially because I’m also an editor.

        Being part of a community means doing a little give-and-take, making sure you’re communicating what you mean. Being a jerk just to get attention or make a point is something I aspire to be better than.

      • Shreyas Says:

        oh hey didn’t mean this to be a reply to ryan’s post oops


  2. I don’t pay attention to anything Ben says on the internet (a case of the tone being too regularly offputting to be worth my time), so if I was building any kind of consensus, it was solely with folks I actually make time for (of the folks I recall listed, that’s… just Ryan).

  3. Shreyas Says:

    Since your reply tree doesn’t go very deep…

    What I ended up implying is that editors were lying, self-serving jerks, which I don’t think is actually the case. Especially because I’m also an editor.

    Well, here’s the thing. When editors say “Every game needs an editor,” or “You get what you pay for,” they are marketing, and when any of us is marketing we are being self-serving jerks. That’s what marketing is.

    But we are in such a very small hobby that we have basically no reason to listen to marketing. I can choose some books that look well-edited to me, and ask their authors who edited them (or just look at the credits) and find out what their experiences were with them. I can ask some people who edit for bids.

    The answers I get, ranging from, “Well usually I charge an arm and a leg but you can get the friend rate,” to “My standard per word rate is,” to, “I’m not actually going to offer you a bid,” give me immeasurably more information than a distrustworthy marketing axiom.

    • Fred Hicks Says:

      I’m not an editor. I doubt I was marketing anything when I said games need editors.


      • Maybe we all just need to be a little more clear? “Need” for me always implies “in order to”, or it’s meaningless. Games need an editor in order to…? Once we clarify that, it’s easier to say “right, that’s my goal, so I need an editor” or “ah, but I have this different goal, so I’ll skip the editor”.

        If someone says, “games need an editor in order to be good” or “playable” or “not broken” or “worth twenty bucks”, I’m going to politely disagree and point to counter-examples. But something like “many games need an editor in order to be more clear” or “realize their full potential” or “put in what the writer assumes but the audience doesn’t know” etc., I think we could all agree to that.

        To me, there’s just been a lot of generalization and absolutes in these recent discussions, and those tend to lead to butting heads…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: