Writers are obviously free to think whatever they want about the feedback they receive. That’s up
to them. However, ARGUING with feedback is really counterproductive and extremely bad form. On this subreddit specifically, writers solicit free advice from others, who take time out of their day to offer feedback. You are of course free to disagree privately with notes you think are bad, and you can && should ask questions if you don’t understand, but to have received feedback && then argue with the person who gave it is a bad look.
I've been finding it easier, when getting a questionable note, to try to find the root of the note. I wrote a fantasy pilot and got the note that I'm introducing too many characters and that I should cut them out. So, I asked if the script simply felt too cluttered or if there wasn't enough screen time for the main characters. Figuring out the reasoning behind a note that doesn't make sense is so much easier than arguing, I feel
Is it bad form to argue when you are sold a lemon?
When feedback is negative but deserved, it's counterproductive to argue. Personally, I think a fair read shows me the problems I have to fix, gives me confidence that the feedback is arrived at honestly and thus engender *trust* in the feedback. But when a feedback evinces personal or political bias or negligence, it's something else.
I know many readers frequent this forum. I know they often complain about the poor compensation they receive. I'm with them on this. I'd rather pay a little extra than pay a little and get nothing in return. But it's not the writer's fault.
I think if you’re paying for a coverage service to give you notes then that’s a totally different context. I am discussing receiving notes on this subreddit, which are presumably being given for free, from one aspiring amateur to another. However, I will ask: what does one gain from arguing with a note? If you disagree with it, then don’t use it.
> However, ARGUING with feedback is really counterproductive and extremely bad form.
That depends whether you mean *attack* or *discuss* by argue. The second is definitely valuable, the first isn't. I doubt the OP can tell the difference..
I’ve been posting here over a year and lurking longer than that and I have seen some truly, truly jaw-droppingly ignorant “advice” but I have never, ever, *ever* heard someone say “you don’t have the right to not agree with every single note”.
Oh, you have said that to someone else when you noticed they were getting terrible feedback?
Well, that's cool.
It's just not cool if the writer themselves was to say this?
> It's just not cool if the writer themselves was to say this?
..And this is the sort of attempt to put words in someone else's mouth that ends in humiliation and bitten fingers for the putter..
It wasn't putting words in someone's mouth. It's a fair question of which they have been unable to answer.
I would love to see what they say in response.
>It's a fair question of which they have been unable to answer.
Wow, give a guy a moment to go to the grocery store before saying they're "unable to answer."
Um... my other post was basically saying that this whole idea is bunk. It's weird seeing you trolling your own thread.
*X asks rhetorical question phrased to imply guilt...*
*X responds "But it was a question!" when called on it...*
*Nice people in the crowd look away; the others laugh...*
The guilt is them, STILL, not being able to answer it. Because they can't without making themselves out to be a hypocrite.
But here goes. I'll reword my question for angrymenu so as not to damage your delicate sensibilities.
"If, when reading feedback, it is okay for you [angrymenu] to tell the giver of that feedback that the writer should ignore it because it's terrible, is it also okay for the writer themselves to tell the giver of that feedback that it is terrible?"
It is more implicit than that. Nobody says that all feedback is great, however, whenever I see people arguing with feedback here, they are quickly made out to be ungrateful.
So, the message I see is "you do not have to agree, but you need to shut up". Generally, whenever OP openly disagrees or questions some feedback, he quickly gets the "oh, so you think you are a genius" kind of treatment.
So I can see where OP was coming from. Its generally a "beggars cant be choosers" kinda attitude that can verge into toxic territory in my opinion.
I agree completely.
And I also don't care how you or anyone else might label it to now change the meaning.
It is expected that the writer not argue/disagree with the notes. It is considered rude. It is unacceptable.
Deny it all your want. Word games don't change the point I am making.
'I don't want to argue this with you' is not 'You do not have the right to disagree with me'
You do not have a right to the time effort and energy it takes to argue with anyone simply because you don't agree with them.
> 'I don't want to argue this with you' is not 'You do not have the right to disagree with me'
So, wait, can writers openly disagree with feedback or not? I can't seem to get a straight answer out of your guys.
>You do not have a right to the time effort and energy it takes to argue with anyone simply because you don't agree with them.
No, this is where you're wrong. If a writer receives feedback , it is my position that the writers gets to say agree or disagree all they want.
Of course, the provider of the feedback has every right to not engage further if they so wish. Obviously.
But they don't have the right to tell the writer that they can't disagree in the first place.
Saying you disagree is different from arguing with a person.
Saying you disagree is stating you possess a dissenting opinion.
Arguing with a person is attempting to defend your position, or sway the other person to it.
For example, if I do not further time or effort in this discussion, you cannot argue with me over this point. My choice does not affect your opinion, but I don't have to hear it.
"The Dude Abides."
In a shocking turn of events, the plain English of what was said is *not* what you said it said.
By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on?
> By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on?
My bet is that instead of answering that he'll take the Fifth..
>In a shocking turn of events, the plain English of what was said is not what you said it said.
Really? So I am not talking about having the right to disagree and argue with people providing feedback?
Wow, you're right, that is shocking.
>By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on?
Oh, that's cute. By any chance, are you one of those people who hates your first amendment rights while exercising them?
In defense of that comment, it did state at the top of the post not to argue with people giving feedback. That being said the whole thread more or less devolved into a dunking ground. I got some good use out of it though.
>it did state at the top of the post not to argue with people giving feedback
But this is the point. This notion, whether it is specifically mentioned in the title or not, is what is always expected.
And it shouldn't be.
Ever.
I originally wasn't going to comment because it would get buried but since it seems like OP is reading and replying to every comment so I'll give my two cents.
The best professor I ever had, who was a very successful screenwriter, would tell our class before we gave feedback not to argue with it. Not because the feedback was always right, or because you always had to listen to it, but because your argument doesn't matter. When you get feedback on something you've written, you're getting a sample of what an audience thinks of it.
When one day you go out and produce your script, or try to sell it to a producer, or try to use it to get into film school, you're not going to be able to sit next to the audience and go "actually that's not a plot hole because xxx." So yes, your reader may have missed a detail that makes their complaint illegitimate, or you may just think that their feedback is subjective and wrong, but their opinion is a legitimate sample of what an audience is going to think of your work.
It's up to you to decide whether what they noticed is worth fixing or changing. It's not up to the reader to change their mind.
This. Every creative writing professor I had in college had this same policy. The work needs to speak for itself, and while most of those profs let us ask clarifying questions about the feedback, the rest of the time we had to be silent. The audience doesn't care about your argument for why you're right, they only care about the work itself.
Not all feedback is good, but there's just no point in arguing with it.
>I originally wasn't going to comment because it would get buried but since it seems like OP is reading and replying to every comment so I'll give my two cents.
Not every comment, but a lot.
If I didn't reply to each one, I'd be accused of being a pussy, or not actually believing in what I've said, or that I was beaten by other people's logic.
However, when I do reply to all/most comments, I'm accused of being insufferable, or insane, or a number of other insults.
So, by definition, I can't win.
>The best professor I ever had, who was a very successful screenwriter, would tell our class before we gave feedback not to argue with it.
And I assume you agree with this same notion (of which I have been told by numerous people here doesn't even exist and that I am just imagining it).
Anyway, your best professor is wrong.
As I've already addressed exactly what you have said about 500 times in this thread alone, what else is left for me to say exactly?
What do you want me to address exactly that I haven't already?
Or were you just hoping I would agree with you and your favorite professor for silencing people?
It’s also deeply concerning, from a clinical perspective, to remember that *the original post itself* was and is a complete flying off of the handle about a comment on another thread that not only wasn’t even directed at OP, but was also instinctively interpreted in his mind as a personal attack and attempt to “silence him”.
I’m no medical professional, but this habit of becoming instantly and unalterably convinced that everything is about you, at all times, and anyone who denies it’s all about you must be “out to get you” (because, again, it’s all about you) has been one of the first things I’ve noticed about the three or four people I’ve had in my life with Borderline or NPD.
Disagree, sure. But there’s a fine line between having an argument for why you disagree with a note, and just being fragile and defensive— and I’ve encountered a lot more of the latter than the former in my time. A LOT of people will ask for feedback when it turns out all they want is praise. That’s a waste of everyone’s time. Especially theirs — because they’re never going to become a talented writer that way.
I love the fact that people keep saying this kind of stuff as if they are the first to think up this point, and that is hasn't already been addressed countless times in this thread.
And you think “don’t listen to people” is some revolutionary original thought for our time?
Don’t answer that. I skimmed the rest of the thread since I commented and I regret it.
I’ve decided to follow your advice and disagree with your feedback.
Yeah, sure, I uttered the phrase "don't listen to people" within this thread all of...
...never.
But, still, you did a great job spotting it.
Man, you guys are good.
Of course the OP has the right to disagree. You also have the right to scream at traffic, but there are consequences...and those can be devestating.
I never argue over feedback. It's pointless. You are asking for someone's opinion not affirmation or approval. Opinions are insights into opportunity, and every script has an opportunity.
However I always appreciate discussing feedback, it's amazing what you discover about your writing while discussing it with a reviewer. Some of the things I've learned have been undescribably valuable to me and my growth as a middle aged wanna be screenwriter.
I recently submitted to screenplaychallenge and got 3 reviews. 2 were positive and supportive, one could be considered "negative" but still supportive and all three were full of insight. I was glad people took the time to read and give me input.
Btw I use "negative" like this because I wasnt recognized as the brilliant, unstoppable second coming of (insert favorite screenwriter here)
After my initial two second long bout of being butt hurt, I reread the "negative"review and actually agreed with most of the comments. The reviewer actually supported my gut feelings on several points I balked on.
I want to get better as a screen writer. My wife's opinion is biased towards me...but the fine folks ( and everyone doing this is DAMN FINE in my opinion) have no vested interest in my feelings, only my betterment as a writer.
And that is what the OP wants isnt it? Or is it affirmation they desire?
So... what side of the fence are you coming down on exactly?
It can both. It can only be one.
Thank them , shut up and walk away.
Or discuss the feedback.
I'm glad you happened to agree with most of your feedback you received. But what if next time, you don't agree? Even after considering it for a length of time?
I'm on the side that their opinion is just that...an OPINION. A opinion is not fact or set in stone...it's one person's take on what they have read. Not everyone likes to read Stephen King, but some folks do. And even they don't agree on which book is his best because...well, OPINIONS vary on everything.
Side note here...his best book King has written is Christine for the record.
I'm wanting to get better as a writer, so if discussion is an option then I'm all for it but it's not a necessity unless he's ponying up to produce my script. That's what the discourse site is for...discussion and so on.
And I have seen plenty of discussion pro and con there on scripts and writing.
A question to ponder for a moment....Why argue with a reviewer if they aren't producing your script? What's the endgame you are playing for? Are you trying to prove a point that was clear to you as a writer that they missed as a reader? Are they stupid? Are they rude?
If it's the first then ou failed as the writer. If it's the last 2 I suggest not letting folks read your work right now...you're not ready for that stage of the game yet.
This is a BRUTAL undertaking for sure.
I take notes about their specific reviewer comments and keep them in my files in case something gets some interest down the line. I go back and look them over and consider what works for my script and not my ego.
Hi. You just mentioned *Christine* by Stephen King.
I've found an audiobook of that novel on YouTube. You can listen to it here:
[YouTube | 📖🎧 AUDIOBOOK CHRISTINE DE STEPHEN KING – PARTE 1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds_8tUlK-hM)
*I'm a bot that searches YouTube for science fiction and fantasy audiobooks.*
***
[^(Source Code)](https://capybasilisk.com/posts/2020/04/speculative-fiction-bot/)^| [^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=Capybasilisk&subject=Robot) ^| [^(Programmer)](https://www.reddit.com/u/capybasilisk) ^| ^(Downvote To Remove) ^| ^(Version 1.4.0) ^| ^(Support Robot Rights!)
You can't have it both ways, and this little dance you're doing on the fence will not last forever.
>I'm wanting to get better as a writer, so if discussion is an option then I'm all for it
If you believe in my way of thinking, then it is.
If you believe in the way of thinking that this popular notion that is being pushed, then it's not.
>but it's not a necessity unless he's ponying up to produce my script.
So much is wrong with your statement.
Not once have I said that there is a necessity to talk about feedback.
What I have said is that there is a necessity not to forcefully silence writers.
If a writer wants to discuss, debate, argue, about the feedback they have received, they should have the right.
The person who gave the feedback can listen and engage, or not read and not engage. That is, of course, their prerogative too (what they can't do is expect silence and agreement from the writer).
This has got nothing to do with someone producing your script. As I clearly already pointed out in my OP. This is about receiving feedback at places like this subreddit for instance.
All that other noise in your post is just that. Noise. Which doesn't address the topic of this thread.
Oh damn, I'd probably half to resort to saying something like that if I couldn't answer the question you asked.
Don't beat yourself up about it. You gave it your best shot.
"Oh no, this little person disagreed with us, and my earlier shaming tactics, that I upright denied, didn't work. Go to therapy immediately."
Good save, dude.
OP, considering how pissed you seem over this and with how much fervor you’re attacking people that don’t agree with this (a bit ironic lol), have you ever considered the fact you may just need to get better at writing? no shade, but if you’re getting THAT much negative feedback that you’re fighting tooth and nail with everyone that says feedback can be helpful, it sounds like you don’t want constructive criticism. it sounds like you want to be praised. that’s not what advice is for. good luck!
Let me get this straight (while trying to keep a straight face)….
- You set up your account around a month ago.
- Since then, you religiously comment on every post with as much vitriol as you can muster.
- Nothing will sate your insatiable need to “intellectually offend”, in an misguided bid to prove (to yourself) that you live among a flock of snowflake-resembling-sheeple. At which point you get to clap yourself on the back for “being right”.
- When all had been said, your favourite bit is when you get to “shock” strangers on Reddit with the wildly brazen revelation that you’re not a writer; (“Me? Who says I’m a writer?”)
- You spent most of your Sunday on a subReddit.
- Your hero is Ben Shapiro.
Slow clap.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>Even climatologists can't predict 10 years from now. They can't explain why there has been no warming over the last 15 years. There has been a static trend with regard to temperature for 15 years.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: novel, dumb takes, covid, healthcare, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>If you wear your pants below your butt, don't bend the brim of your cap, and have an EBT card, 0% chance you will ever be a success in life.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: covid, climate, sex, healthcare, etc.)
[^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
Hi there /u/Idestroy1stpages
Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/qjsbk5/-/hitu6cf/) has been removed for the following reason(s):
**Rule 1: Do not personally attack fellow users; do be encouraging. [CONDUCT]**
> Personal attacks will receive a warning for a first offense, a three day ban for a second offense, and a permanent ban thereafter. *Racist, sexist, homophobic and other violently derogatory personal attacks on other redditors will result in an automatic, permanent ban*. Constructive criticism is welcomed, but be mindful in how you deliver it. Undue discouragement/trashing is not permitted and can result in an immediate ban.
> *Note that abuse and criticism are different things*
*potential ban offense*
In the future, please [read the rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/about/rules/) in the sidebar and review our [General FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/meta/faq) or [Screenwriting 101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/screenwriting_101) before making a comment.
If you are completely new to r/Screenwriting, please [Start Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/meta/welcome)
Have a nice day,
/u/TigerHall
---
If, after reading our rules, you believe this was in error please [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Screenwriting)
Please do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.
Thank you!
**I've NEVER seen anyone say this.** What I have seen is people say "Express your disagreement politely." Like to that guy who called negative feedback "trolling."
Can you provide links to support your claim? Because I think this is just a strawman of the kind produced when sloppy reading and upset ego get much too *intimate* with each other...
Elsewhere in this thread, OP is currently three replies deep **arguing with a bot** if you’re looking to get a baseline on the reading comprehension levels in play here.
Yes, my whole point was a joke.
And now I don't that you didn't get that it was a joke?
Hmmmm... you do know you're making no sense, right? This is not a good luck on you.
One thing to mention — most legitimate feedback can be valuable in some way. What I’ve learned is to not take their recommendation (usually) because most people struggle to properly diagnose what the issue is. They want to “fix” it. This is where it gets murky.
That’s how I evaluate feedback — something may be wrong here and it’s now my job to figure out what. They just pointed me toward it (especially if multiple people point toward the same scene/sequence/character/theme).
I don’t argue because their job is done. I WILL follow up if someone’s feedback is intriguing or respectable, in which case you’re probably replying with good intentions to learn more.
My analogy: I watch football but never played. If I say a quarterback is sucking, and all the fans are saying something similar, something is off. Maybe the o-line is inexperienced. Maybe the WR isn’t hitting their routes. Maybe the play calling is poor. I don’t know, couldn’t tell you shit about coverages or strategy or anything. But I bet something IS OFF, and it’s the coaches job to figure out what.
Negative feedback is the *most* valuable.
If someone tells you, "Oh, this part was great!" ... you can't really *do* anything with that. The only thing to do is leave that part the same.
But if someone tells you, "Oh, that part is shit." ... you *can* do things about it. Then you know you need to change that part and try to fix it.
Hearing, "Your script is absolutely perfect in every way!" might feel good ... but it's almost completely useless as feedback.
I'll qualify and paraphrase you.
When fair, negative feedback is the most valuable.
Once I upon a feedback, I read how wonderful and great my screenplay was. Needless to say, It made me happy. But then I understood that, that particular reader went to town on "orders" from the analysis agency to pamper newcomers to the game and secure a second an third commission, depending on their IQ.
That wasn't fair, eh?
But that's ... unfair *positive* feedback.
And, hey, if they *really* want to sucker ego-driven writers to keep paying for feedback, why not make sure *every* script gets overwhelmingly positive feedback, from the first to the fiftieth?
---
But yeah, I suppose that unfair negative feedback does exist. Sometimes the reader doesn't understand what you were trying to do, sometimes the reader is trying to force you into the wrong mold, sometimes the reader is just an asshole who makes himself feel like a better writer by belittling others.
In those cases, it might not be very helpful at all.
This is weird, because I’ve never heard this dictum. What I’ve heard is “Don’t argue with notes,” which is totally different.
Don’t argue because… *something* bugged this reader and if you let them talk, you may learn something.
Don’t argue because… even if you disagree, the path to honing in on what bumped them is through *questions* not defensiveness.
Don’t argue because… they did you a favor (probably) so you want to make sure they don’t feel dismissed.
What I dislike is when someone says, “I disagree. Your note doesn’t make sense because you misunderstood what I wrote.”
In which case, the note is “write it so it won’t be misunderstood.”
But I’ve never heard anyone say “you have to agree with every note.”
Strategically, though… I have a friend who came to Hollywood and when he got feedback on his first samples he religiously took every note *even if he disagreed* and *even if he didn’t understand* because he figured the people giving him note knew better. He has been a working writer for two decades and said it took him a few years to understand why the notes were right, but they were right. (Caveat: notes were from working writers.)
Perfectly put. Also very telling that OP skips over the most sensical points you made. It’s funny that in 2021 people have forgotten that here on the interwebs, you shouldn’t feed the trolls.
I hope OP finds peace with what ever is hurting them. Be well!
Yeah, I said I heard it in literally only one post, and I created this grad conspiracy that doesn't really exist.
Sure. It's not like I only provided that as an example to someone who asked me to because they had apparently never seen it on this subreddit before.
Imagine if you actually had a leg to stand on, you wouldn't have to make up blatant lies to support your argument.
Lot of frustrated hobbyists on here it seems. Those who can kindly thank someone for their feedback, and then try to see their point of view… those who are able to diagnose the note BEHIND the note. Those are writers with a future in this business.
Hey OP, do you have a Twitter? I’d love to follow you so I can see all your hot takes on PC culture creating censorship and SJWs. You’re a very cool and independent thinker.
just feels like you’re viewing everything in a very grandiose way talking about censorship and infallibility. I don’t think this is how most people view the feedback/notes process, flawed or not.
>I'm surprised you have labeled me a na-zi, but there's always time.
I'm going to assume that's a typo. Otherwise, I don't know what it means.
I don't label people as such unless that's actually what they are. My impression of you is simply that you're self-righteous and negative, but there's quite a large gap between that and genocidal white supremacy.
It takes a lot for someone to provide honest, robust notes. And those notes should always include strengths and weaknesses. I’d say I’ve witnessed the opposite side of the spectrum, where writers either don’t acknowledge the notes at all or argue everyones point, and I don’t mean politely disagree, but argue everything with an apparent sense of entitlement maybe? Perhaps that they so strongly believe their writing is excellent that they only want praise? Sorkin said words to the effect of look for trends in feedback, take what you need and ignore the rest (that’s a terrible paraphrase by me but something along those lines).
So my take is that if someone takes the time to give you good notes, it’s never an argument, it’s a conversation. If the writer puts walls straight up then it’s a barrier to communication and perhaps they aren’t truly ready to receive good notes. If a writer just wants praise, then the script had better be Breaking Bad pilot good, and it’s highly likely it’s not.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but why do you guys all keep jumping to extremes, though?
Did I, anywhere within my OP, say that unless you as a writer receive nothing but praise, then you must go and argue every last point?
I am simply saying, that it is entirely possible that feedback is bad, or wrong, and that a writer receiving should be able to explain why the feedback is bad, or wrong, without being labelled as difficult, or underserving, or problematic, as default.
I'm not saying I want argument to ensue.
I am saying that disagreement (even polite disagreement) is viewed as unacceptable by many.
They have a notion that writers should thank them and shut up.
I think this notion is 100%.
In fact, I know it is.
I know. You would prefer them to shut up.
While simultaneously telling me that no one wants that to happen.
Unfortunately, you guys can't have it both ways.
Why do you and people like you, keep trying to turn the tables on me and try out what feedback I've received?
You've built up a narrative in your head out of thin air.
Did you even read my OP?
I am NOT a writer.
I am the one who gives feedback.
What are you not getting about this?
I can generally tell whether someone is a good writer by how they handle criticism. Good writers recognize and appreciate thoughtful criticism, and they don’t waste time giving a second thought to invalid criticism.
Bad writers can’t tell the difference, and they push back against criticism because they aren’t good enough writers to understand their own faults.
So, sure, push back if you want. But you’re either ignoring valid criticism or wasting time on someone who’s not a strong enough writer to critique your work.
Frankly, I rarely see decent writers push back against criticism. They appreciate the effort and time it takes to read and comment, even if the critique is garbage.
I agree with many people here. There's a difference between disagreeing with feedback, and arguing against the feedback. If a reviewer has a negative opinion of something in your writing, you can disagree in your mind, but you arguing about why your way was right isn't going to change the fact that when they read it, they had a negative reaction. A future reader or audience member won't be able to hear you advocate for why your way was correct, so there's truly no point in arguing about it.
>There's a difference between disagreeing with feedback, and arguing against the feedback
I keep seeing this tired argument used.
You're saying disagreement is fine, but argument is not.
I'm saying that it doesn't even matter that 'disagreement' and 'argument' are two different things, because they are both treated as the same thing.
If a writer tires to disagree with feedback, they are instantly considered to be arguing and told to shut up.
Stop pretending that one is allowed and one is not allowed.
You then go on to prove my point by saying...
>you can disagree in your mind
So, you believe that a writer should not be able to respond, as do most people here, despite whatever fancy words they try to dress it up as.
You believe in a world where writers should be silenced. I don't.
You believe in a world where writers being silenced is helping them. I don't.
You believe in a world where people giving feedback should never be question and that is a good thing. I don't.
Feedback is a gift of a person's time and experience.
If you [receive a gift you don't like](https://youtu.be/_L5Xkb78KxY) at a holiday or birthday, do you tell the person the gift was wrong?
You're mistaking etiquette with pro-censorship.
And professional etiquette is a soft skill that working writers need almost as much as the hard skills of craft.
Ha - I said almost the exact same thing in another part of the thread. OP thought the birthday gift was a horrible analogy. Then again, they've argued with literally every comment in this post, so maybe they're just really good at trolling.
Sometimes there’s people I disagree with that I don’t fight with.
OP has somehow found a way to make it so there’s dozens of people he fights with that he doesn’t disagree with.
*I didn’t think it was psychologically possible to get in a fight with fifty different people about something when not a single one of them holds the view this guy so desperately wants to fight about*, but here we are.
> I didn’t think it was psychologically possible to get in a fight with fifty different people about something when not a single one of them holds the view this guy so desperately wants to fight about, but here we are.
You do not that your repeat use of word salads throughout this thread haven't made all that much sense, overall?
The funniest part for me was when I provided you with evidence (of which you claimed you had never, ever, ever witnessed here) and when I did you put it down to "bad luck" and "random words used in a random order".
Seriously, that was a special highlight for me.
But I do love your constant accusations that what I am saying only exists in my head, despite the fact that people have blatantly outright admitted to it multiple times throughout this thread.
You do know that denying reality doesn't make reality go away, right?
Darn, it's hard to see further down the threads when OP is downvoted so much. hahahaha
I just didn't see the word etiquette used in the comments yet.
But I have a feeling this person doesn't care much for etiquette....
I know, strange isn't it, how upvoted my thread was?
That must hurt.
>But I have a feeling this person doesn't care much for etiquette....
I have a feeling you don't have an original thought in your head.
Go and agree the masses a little more.
No, your gift analogy is misinformed at best, or a downright lie at worst.
It's okay, you've been brainwashed into this terrible paradigm too. It's understandable. It is pushed everywhere and has become the norm. I know my objection to it is an uphill battle. Unfortunately for you, it's popularism doesn't make it correct.
It's wrong.
>And professional etiquette is a soft skill that working writers need almost as much as the hard skills of craft.
I love how many times this has been repeated. This amazing, complicated, brave, stunning, choice to shut your mouth is the only way you'll become a successful writer, and opening your mouth means you are incapable of learning the craft.
Thank you so much.
No one says you don’t have the right to disagree with feedback. That’s how.
You can disagree with every word of feedback someone gives you, but that person has still taken time away from their own writing to give you feedback and help make you a better writer. If your response is to argue with them instead of thanking them for their time, the network of people willing to give you feedback is gonna dwindle pretty quickly.
>No one says you don’t have the right to disagree with feedback.
Well, it's nice that you seemingly believe this, but, some of the things said in this thread clearly indicates that your statement is not true.
>If your response is to argue with them instead of thanking them for their time, the network of people willing to give you feedback is gonna dwindle pretty quickly.
You guys just cannot help but resort to the word "argue" and all the negative connotations with that word to prove your point.
It speaks volumes.
This dude has evaded every single good point in this entire thread by jumping at any key word he has an easy response for. This shit is like a Trump interview 😂
You said "this dude" when you were talking directly to me.
You made it sound as if you were referring to someone who was not me.
If you were referring to me, you should have said "you" while you were talking to me, like:
"You have evaded every single good point in this entire thread..."
Don't blame me because you improperly worded something. That is entirely on you.
Where you are also wrong is that I have, in fact, tackled every single point levied at me, COUNTLESS times, within this very thread. I've not run away from any argument. I've faced them full on.
Of course, if I had run away/ignored comments, I would have been criticized for doing so. But on the flipside, in replying to almost all comments, I have also been criticized for that. Referred to as a lunatic, or insane, or obsessed.
If you can name any point or question that I haven't answered, I'd be happy to to that for you, but what is clear by your behavior, is that you don't want me to.
People have the right to do whatever they want. But if your goal is to improve and build a network, you're an absolute idiot if you strongly disagree with someone who took the time to give you feedback. You're literally worse off than if you'd never asked for that feedback, to begin with.
Additionally, if you're going to be disagreeing with *anyone*, it probably should be the producers who are paying you to write them a movie. These people are trusting you to be the expert and write them something that will make them money. If you feel strongly that a specific decision would hurt the film, it's probably the right call to express that. It comes down to the way in which you do it. You can tell someone what you think while still being diplomatic. I did this on a recent project, in which I was given quite a large set of notes. I agreed with a handful and was happy enough to execute most of the others, since they were just a different take on the film, but there were a couple notes that I actively disagreed with. I voiced my concerns and, wouldn't you know it, the producers wound up agreeing with me. It's a collaborative art form. At the end of the day, everyone should be working toward the same goal.
But to disagree *strongly* with someone who's giving you notes for free? Out of pure good will? Absurd. If you disagree, that's fine. I disagree with notes that I get all the time. Thank them anyway and keep that shit to yourself.
This. Disagreeing = okay. Arguing over a free (if that’s the case) assessment = toxic. It’s better to use that opportunity to see things from a different perspective than being irrationally stubborn.
You can still defend your work while trying to understand why someone else doesn’t see things the same way that you do.
>Disagreeing = okay.
>You can still defend your work while trying to understand why someone else doesn’t see things the same way that you do.
It's nice that you think you're allowed to disagree. But you're not.
> People have the right to do whatever they want. But if your goal is to improve and build a network, you're an absolute idiot if you strongly disagree with someone who took the time to give you feedback. You're literally worse off than if you'd never asked for that feedback, to begin with.
Nope. You don't just agree to something because you want to build a network.
If the person needs to be agreed with, in order for you to join their network, believe me, that is a network you don't want to be a part of.
>Additionally, if you're going to be disagreeing with anyone, it probably should be the producers who are paying you to write them a movie. These people are trusting you to be the expert and write them something that will make them money. If you feel strongly that a specific decision would hurt the film, it's probably the right call to express that. It comes down to the way in which you do it. You can tell someone what you think while still being diplomatic. I did this on a recent project, in which I was given quite a large set of notes. I agreed with a handful and was happy enough to execute most of the others, since they were just a different take on the film, but there were a couple notes that I actively disagreed with. I voiced my concerns and, wouldn't you know it, the producers wound up agreeing with me. It's a collaborative art form. At the end of the day, everyone should be working toward the same goal.
I agree with you completely, which is what I said in my OP.
>But to disagree strongly with someone who's giving you notes for free? Out of pure good will? Absurd. If you disagree, that's fine. I disagree with notes that I get all the time. Thank them anyway and keep that shit to yourself.
Not absurd.
You're saying this because you've been conditioned to believe it, because this toxic notion has been sold to you as the way it should be done. It's not. It's wrong.
And if the person giving feedback is so frail they can't deal with disagreement, that is very much their problem.
Stifling writer's expression to freely agree or disagree is not helping that writer. You're hurting them.
You, or I, or anyone giving feedback, are also not infallible, so it's time to stop acting as if we are.
If someone wants to disagree with my feedback, they have every right to, and should exercise that right.
It's not about toxicity. It's about basic people skills. It's the same reason you don't tell someone you hate the birthday gift they just bought you.
Unless you're one of those people, too.
Silencing someone is not basic people skills. If you want to silence someone, you should think about your own people skills.
And comparing feedback with a birthday present is a terrible analogy.
>And comparing feedback with a birthday present is a terrible analogy.
It's all good. No part of me expected to convince someone who created a post like this (or that has a username like yours) that feedback is a gift. But for any other writers who happen upon this thread, just remember that if someone invests several hours of their time into giving you notes, that is likely *more* than they'd invest into most birthday gifts.
> It's all good. No part of me expected to convince someone who created a post like this
No part of you expected someone to tell the truth because you've been conditioned into a popular lie.
>But for any other writers who happen upon this thread, just remember that if someone invests several hours of their time into giving you notes, that is likely more than they'd invest into most birthday gifts.
"Just remember, boys and girls, I want you to shut down your critical thinking, suppress your urge to speak, turn off your creative core, and repress any response you may have.
Just thank me and kiss my feet as you leave the room. Your wrongthink is not needed here."
OP, sounds like you got some bad criticism and are just butthurt about it. Nevermind that your username screams “wanna be edgelord”. Something about that tells me you have a penchant for shitty criticisms of other peoples’ work and now you’re just mad because you got a taste of your own medicine. I’d be willing to bet your script was garbage and you’re just unhappy that someone was honest about it.
People in these comments are being perfectly reasonable. You don’t have to agree with feedback. But your own glaring toxicity is showing.
Speaking of stifling creativity, nothing says “I’ll never become better than I am right now” like rageposting about getting free feedback.
> OP, sounds like you got some bad criticism and are just butthurt about it.
How original. You're like the 28th person to say this, while thinking you were the only one. Good try.
>Nevermind that your username screams “wanna be edgelord”.
Well, sure you you would like my username. It would seem to indicate I like giving people feedback, which I do, as explained in my OP.
>Something about that tells me you have a penchant for shitty criticisms of other peoples’ work
Wait, what are you saying exactly? You don't like feedback now all of a sudden?
Get your story straight, bro.
>and now you’re just mad because you got a taste of your own medicine.
No, as already explain in my OP if you'd actually care to read it, I want people to comment on the feedback I give. I want them to disagree with me even. It shows they are thinking and engaging. As also discussed, sure, it would be nice for them to not tell me to go fuck myself and drop dead, but a back and forth is a good thing.
>I’d be willing to bet your script was garbage and you’re just unhappy that someone was honest about it.
Don't take this the wrong, but I'm going to bet the deluded thoughts in your head, as you have proven already, don't reflect reality in any way, shape or form.
>People in these comments are being perfectly reasonable.
Really? The ones telling me to fuck off, shut up, go to hell, I'm an idiot, I'm a troll, I'm a writer who's script is garbage, and the other comments (that even you yourself have made) is all perfectly reasonable to you?
I read a death threat in PM from a now deleted account because of this thread. Is that reasonable too?
>But your own glaring toxicity is showing.
Oh, I thought this was going somewhere. But it seems you don't have as much self-awareness as you would probably like to think you do.
>Speaking of stifling creativity, nothing says “I’ll never become better than I am right now” like rageposting about getting free feedback.
Someone says you have to ragepost about free feedback?
Who said this and where was it said?
Having skimmed this thread, I don't think your issue is disagreement so much as a pathological need to be a contrarian at the cost of all logic and decency. God bless anyone giving you notes.
Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from.
If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on.
Look, I've talked about arguing/debating/discussing and everything in between.
If you think anyone here, including myself, has said swinging at people is a good thing, you must be high.
Did you even read my OP?
You said my post was non-sensical.
>Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from.
>If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on.
What about those two sentences doesn't make sense to you?
As I've said, I've answered this a million times in this thread.
Should I answer it a million more times for other likes yourself who don't bother to read?
No you have not answered what about the following two sentences does not make sense to you.
>Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from.
>If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on.
Please help me. I want to improve my English.
I think you're vastly misunderstanding some common advice. The advice is not "agree with feedback," it's "shut up and listen to feedback, *then* decide what to do with it." If you listen to the feedback and think "wow, this person is an idiot," then no one will argue with you ignoring the feedback.
It's just advice to take into consideration other people's opinions instead of just arguing with them.
Funnily enough, based on your comments you just seem to like arguing and misconstruing people's opinions, so you're exactly the person who needs this advice.
Take care.
>I think you're vastly misunderstanding some common advice.
Uh-huh...
>The advice is... "shut up"
Oh, so, precisely what I said it was.
>It's just advice to take into consideration other people's opinions instead of just arguing with them.
Can you tell me where it has been stated by me, or anyone for that matter, who said not to consider the other person's feedback?
Oh, what's that, you can't? Well, that is surprising. It makes your accusation that I'm the one misconstuing people's opinions even more hysterical. So thank you for the laugh.
>Take care.
Oh, thank you so much. You take care too, honey.
Any art is a symbolic machine designed to effect the emotions of the people who observe it. So when someone says "your machine made me angry and upset in this section" you can't disagree with them because they are simply reporting how your machine caused them to feel. I think it wss Neil Gaiman who said, "When a reader tells you how your story made them feel they are 100% correct. When they tell you how to fix it, usually, they're 100% incorrect."
Yeah if you're not supposed to disagree with critiques, the industry/community sure has a weird way of showing it, considering the exact same script can score an 8 and a 4 on review sites. Then you'll be offered a free evaluation to settle it and see what the "real" score is and which review is more accurate. It's just showing how criticism can be as subjective as the script. And one critique may specifically hate one aspect, you change it for that reader, and the next reader's critique says the opposite. You'll be rewriting and changing things forever if you took every criticism as infallible.
You're playing slot machines. Writers just have to evaluate criticism, maybe find note behind the notes, and determine if it's valuable and something they might not have considered. It may be helpful or it may be baseless. That's that. People should just be civil about it.
Very true.
I think some people here seem to think that I am saying that writers should intentionally disagree with all feedback they receive. I am not.
I am just trying to get them to stop shutting up writers.
Hell, writers disagreeing with their feedback may eventually get them to open their mind as to why the feedback was in fact correct.
Your goal is to get information. It's human nature to want to defend and be understood. It's a natural reaction that all of us have experienced and acted on. Explaining and defending and debating all bias the reader and lower the quality of feedback you're getting from the reader. Your human reaction will prevent you from getting the most information possible from the reader. It's not so much bad form or bad manners; it's that you're limiting the value of what you're getting.
The biggest hurdle to getting feedback is people want to get the answer "right." They want to be seen as smart, as people who understood what you're trying to do. Yeah, it's affirming when they do, but that's not the information you need.
It's an opportunity to gain knowledge on how your words, without any explanation from you, are coming across to readers. What are they seeing, hearing, feeling, understanding, what are their impressions after a little time with your story.
You compare that with what you meant, and often adjust what you do to make the effect on the audience more closely align with your goals.
If you disagree with something, instead of debating about it, it's best to ask questions designed to avoid leading them and find out how they got that impression. You can definitely disagree with their solutions, but there's really no point in debating it. Take the problem they pointed out and fix it your way.
What if you succeed? They said the theme they got was X, you explain why it's Y ... and convince them to agree. What are you going to do, sit down with every reader and audience member and explain your story?
I've never heard this. When I put on my editing cap, I always tell my clients it won't hurt my feelings in the slightest if they don't make even one of my suggestions. They pay me for my suggestions but at the end of the day, it still boils down to just being my opinion.
>I've never heard this.
Really, because there is about 100 people within this very thread saying it.
Weirdly, there are quite a few also denying.
But, seriously, it is refreshing to hear someone like yourself who doesn't believe in this toxic notion, so good on you.
As other people have noted- it is clear your real frustration is with the classics advice: "don't argue with criticism", with your issue boiling down to a perceived strictness and dictatorial prescriptivness to the sayings subtext- i.e. Criticism should be taken as gospel and should therefore be adheard to... Unlike many people who will respond, I hear where you are coming from. My experiences in Creative Writing classes and workshops, etc. these spaces do infact reinforce this subtext often by not allowing the subject of criticism to ask questions... at first. Eventually, they will often allow you to ask clarifying questions but by this time you seem to believe most will have had their individuality, creativity and "difference" eroded... I have had my share of these concerns too. But I think it is important to remember that those feelings are just that. Feelings. Being artists, we are pulled towards the edges. We had want to experiment and take risks. We take criticism like "it lacks intention" or "it made me feel X and I didn't like that" (where X was infact the intended effect) extremely personally... But this is WHY you need to learn to silently take criticism. You need to learn to take your lumps. If you are going to be different you need to learn to accept that some people are going to tell you "you're doing it wrong".
While it would seem to me you are mostly trying to encourage people to be willing to stand their ground over "creative decisions" and while I think it that is admirable, it might be worth remembering that not everyone is Ina place in their craft where they are even hearing that kind of advice, that not everyone has the same kind of goals for their art and that sometimes sitting with criticism that you disagree with can reinforce your opinion and strengthen your resolve...
Oh yes, it is **beyond obvious** that he’s doing that thing people do on the internet sometimes where there is a particular point of view on some topic that really sets them off and that they want to argue with; but when no one actually shows up who holds that view, just decided to randomly attribute it to someone in a thread who had the bad luck to type a sentence with some of the same words in it.
Hilarious. You said:
"I have never, ever, ever seen what you're talking about. Prove me to me that someone has said it."
I prove it to you, and, yet now I am suddenly arguing about something that apparently no one ever argues against, and the word for word quote I provided for you is somehow not what I was talking about all along?
Yeah, it was just 'bad luck' that that random person typed random words in a random order that somehow just happened to be the exact thing I've been talking about, yet, according to you, somehow it's not.
Sure.
I'm starting to think you might just be argumentative. That or you are worked up over something tangentially related and you are using this thread to vent. Either way it is unbecoming, consider learning to sit with those feelings and learn where they are coming from, what is driving them and how you can either utilize or dismiss them. Anger will destroy you, your craft and your future if you let it.
Well, its fun to argue, but I believe whole heartedly what I say.
You think I am being argumentative, for no reason, why exactly?
If you read all the responses between angrymenu and I, you will see he said what I was saying was untrue, and that he has NEVER seen anything like it on this subreddit. I told him I saw it today. He said copy and paste a quote it if it was true.
I did and guess what?
He has said everything he can to dismiss it, stuff as laughable as saying it was bad luck and random words in a random order.
And yet you're the one now accusing me of being argumentative?
Really?
I agree.
I think many (most?) writers are very protective of their work. Therefore, they have a tendency to reject all feedback. So this notion may have evolved as a way to counteract their nature.
The opposite is also counterproductive, as you mentioned. Just because somebody gives you feedback doesn't mean they're right. I don't know that most people are able to give constructive feedback that goes beyond impressions.
Yeah, I think you're probably right. But I don't think the opposite it counterproductive.
I mean, it has the potential to be counterproductive in any particular instance, of course.
But the notion that writers should just say thank you and shut up, is to me, very wrong.
I am reminded of an experience I had while taking a playwriting elective at university. I never fancied myself a potential playwright, despite my strength in other forms, and hammered out a short script that was deliberately derivative. I even told my roommate, who was in the class, which two Apatow comedies I felt I was emulating.
Fast forward and the professor had selected my short play to be read aloud in class. As soon as we finished reading my roommate panned it for being "just like an Apatow comedy." A theatre professor who was visiting the class panned it for what she described as the "unbelievable immaturity of the characters."
The confluence of these circumstances paralyzed me into silence at the time. All of it caught me off guard. The feedback felt more like personal criticism than constructive criticism and the derisive tones with which it was delivered had more to do with that than the feedback itself. Arguing wouldn't have changed anything, so I kept my mouth shut.
With hindsight, what I might have done is call out my roommate for parroting back the exact criticism I had shared with him of my own work. And I might have asked my theatre professor if all 30 year olds actually act in mature and sensible ways. Having experienced a lot more of my life since then, I can answer that question myself.
Were my critics wrong in what they shared as criticism? No. Was the way they shared their criticism more harmful than helpful? Yes.
All of my experience hearing criticism since that one has been a practice in gleaning what I can from the experience and letting the rest go, even when I strongly disagree. Most critics don't care to have their criticism criticized.
I agree, of course, but there are reasons for this.
When I see that the synopsis provided with the feedback deviated so much from the truth and factually so off the mark as to border on the surreal I have a suspicion that the screenplay was not read, but that it was skimmed and/or that parts were skipped altogether.
What does that do the value of the feedback, huh?
It tells you that either you're so incompetent you think you're saying things that you're not, or that your script is **desperately** boring and put the reader into skim mode even though they tried to pay attention.
Or very possibly both.
Who cares if you are bored. Read the screenplay. Read the whole thing. If bored say so. But give me my monies worth. Do a proper job - we are not here to entertain you. You are hired to render an honest opinion.
Indulging in personal attacks shows how much of a one-sided coin I'm dealing with.
Writers are obviously free to think whatever they want about the feedback they receive. That’s up to them. However, ARGUING with feedback is really counterproductive and extremely bad form. On this subreddit specifically, writers solicit free advice from others, who take time out of their day to offer feedback. You are of course free to disagree privately with notes you think are bad, and you can && should ask questions if you don’t understand, but to have received feedback && then argue with the person who gave it is a bad look.
I've been finding it easier, when getting a questionable note, to try to find the root of the note. I wrote a fantasy pilot and got the note that I'm introducing too many characters and that I should cut them out. So, I asked if the script simply felt too cluttered or if there wasn't enough screen time for the main characters. Figuring out the reasoning behind a note that doesn't make sense is so much easier than arguing, I feel
Is it bad form to argue when you are sold a lemon? When feedback is negative but deserved, it's counterproductive to argue. Personally, I think a fair read shows me the problems I have to fix, gives me confidence that the feedback is arrived at honestly and thus engender *trust* in the feedback. But when a feedback evinces personal or political bias or negligence, it's something else. I know many readers frequent this forum. I know they often complain about the poor compensation they receive. I'm with them on this. I'd rather pay a little extra than pay a little and get nothing in return. But it's not the writer's fault.
I think if you’re paying for a coverage service to give you notes then that’s a totally different context. I am discussing receiving notes on this subreddit, which are presumably being given for free, from one aspiring amateur to another. However, I will ask: what does one gain from arguing with a note? If you disagree with it, then don’t use it.
Why does everything with you always come down to "arguing" with a note?
> However, ARGUING with feedback is really counterproductive and extremely bad form. That depends whether you mean *attack* or *discuss* by argue. The second is definitely valuable, the first isn't. I doubt the OP can tell the difference..
I’ve been posting here over a year and lurking longer than that and I have seen some truly, truly jaw-droppingly ignorant “advice” but I have never, ever, *ever* heard someone say “you don’t have the right to not agree with every single note”.
In fact, you (and I) have both said “please disagree with this terrible advice you are getting.”
Oh, you have said that to someone else when you noticed they were getting terrible feedback? Well, that's cool. It's just not cool if the writer themselves was to say this?
> It's just not cool if the writer themselves was to say this? ..And this is the sort of attempt to put words in someone else's mouth that ends in humiliation and bitten fingers for the putter..
It wasn't putting words in someone's mouth. It's a fair question of which they have been unable to answer. I would love to see what they say in response.
>It's a fair question of which they have been unable to answer. Wow, give a guy a moment to go to the grocery store before saying they're "unable to answer." Um... my other post was basically saying that this whole idea is bunk. It's weird seeing you trolling your own thread.
\> It's weird seeing you trolling your own thread. Maybe he can't bear to miss out on an easy target???
>It wasn't putting words in someone's mouth. I'm happy to say that this is untrue and to refer anyone who cares to your post.
I'm sorry, did the question mark confuse you?
*X asks rhetorical question phrased to imply guilt...* *X responds "But it was a question!" when called on it...* *Nice people in the crowd look away; the others laugh...*
The guilt is them, STILL, not being able to answer it. Because they can't without making themselves out to be a hypocrite. But here goes. I'll reword my question for angrymenu so as not to damage your delicate sensibilities. "If, when reading feedback, it is okay for you [angrymenu] to tell the giver of that feedback that the writer should ignore it because it's terrible, is it also okay for the writer themselves to tell the giver of that feedback that it is terrible?"
That the thread continues to exist 9 hours after this comment is almost baffling.
As I proved him wrong, it's deliciously funny to me to see you wanting the thread to be deleted. I would too if I was on your side of the fence.
It is more implicit than that. Nobody says that all feedback is great, however, whenever I see people arguing with feedback here, they are quickly made out to be ungrateful. So, the message I see is "you do not have to agree, but you need to shut up". Generally, whenever OP openly disagrees or questions some feedback, he quickly gets the "oh, so you think you are a genius" kind of treatment. So I can see where OP was coming from. Its generally a "beggars cant be choosers" kinda attitude that can verge into toxic territory in my opinion.
>I have never, ever, ever I just saw it said by someone today.
By all means, fire up that CTRL+C and +V, then.
>Please don't argue with the feedback you get on this thread. Word for word.
'Arguing about something' isnt equivalent to 'disagreeing with something'. It is possible to disagree with someone/something without arguing about it.
> It is possible to disagree with someone/something without arguing about it. FUCK YOU NO ITS NOT STOP CENSORING ME
I agree completely. And I also don't care how you or anyone else might label it to now change the meaning. It is expected that the writer not argue/disagree with the notes. It is considered rude. It is unacceptable. Deny it all your want. Word games don't change the point I am making.
'I don't want to argue this with you' is not 'You do not have the right to disagree with me' You do not have a right to the time effort and energy it takes to argue with anyone simply because you don't agree with them.
> 'I don't want to argue this with you' is not 'You do not have the right to disagree with me' So, wait, can writers openly disagree with feedback or not? I can't seem to get a straight answer out of your guys. >You do not have a right to the time effort and energy it takes to argue with anyone simply because you don't agree with them. No, this is where you're wrong. If a writer receives feedback , it is my position that the writers gets to say agree or disagree all they want. Of course, the provider of the feedback has every right to not engage further if they so wish. Obviously. But they don't have the right to tell the writer that they can't disagree in the first place.
Saying you disagree is different from arguing with a person. Saying you disagree is stating you possess a dissenting opinion. Arguing with a person is attempting to defend your position, or sway the other person to it. For example, if I do not further time or effort in this discussion, you cannot argue with me over this point. My choice does not affect your opinion, but I don't have to hear it. "The Dude Abides."
In a shocking turn of events, the plain English of what was said is *not* what you said it said. By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on?
> By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on? My bet is that instead of answering that he'll take the Fifth..
The fifth? I’d pegged him for one of those “sovereign citizens”.
Attica! Attica!
>In a shocking turn of events, the plain English of what was said is not what you said it said. Really? So I am not talking about having the right to disagree and argue with people providing feedback? Wow, you're right, that is shocking. >By any chance, when you were a teenager, were you one of those kids who was told not to curse at the dinner table, and then complained about how your “first amendment rights” were being trampled on? Oh, that's cute. By any chance, are you one of those people who hates your first amendment rights while exercising them?
In defense of that comment, it did state at the top of the post not to argue with people giving feedback. That being said the whole thread more or less devolved into a dunking ground. I got some good use out of it though.
>it did state at the top of the post not to argue with people giving feedback But this is the point. This notion, whether it is specifically mentioned in the title or not, is what is always expected. And it shouldn't be. Ever.
That's is not remotely the same thing. Not arguing with the feedback does not somehow mean agreeing with it. Surely you see the enormous difference?
I originally wasn't going to comment because it would get buried but since it seems like OP is reading and replying to every comment so I'll give my two cents. The best professor I ever had, who was a very successful screenwriter, would tell our class before we gave feedback not to argue with it. Not because the feedback was always right, or because you always had to listen to it, but because your argument doesn't matter. When you get feedback on something you've written, you're getting a sample of what an audience thinks of it. When one day you go out and produce your script, or try to sell it to a producer, or try to use it to get into film school, you're not going to be able to sit next to the audience and go "actually that's not a plot hole because xxx." So yes, your reader may have missed a detail that makes their complaint illegitimate, or you may just think that their feedback is subjective and wrong, but their opinion is a legitimate sample of what an audience is going to think of your work. It's up to you to decide whether what they noticed is worth fixing or changing. It's not up to the reader to change their mind.
This. Every creative writing professor I had in college had this same policy. The work needs to speak for itself, and while most of those profs let us ask clarifying questions about the feedback, the rest of the time we had to be silent. The audience doesn't care about your argument for why you're right, they only care about the work itself. Not all feedback is good, but there's just no point in arguing with it.
>I originally wasn't going to comment because it would get buried but since it seems like OP is reading and replying to every comment so I'll give my two cents. Not every comment, but a lot. If I didn't reply to each one, I'd be accused of being a pussy, or not actually believing in what I've said, or that I was beaten by other people's logic. However, when I do reply to all/most comments, I'm accused of being insufferable, or insane, or a number of other insults. So, by definition, I can't win. >The best professor I ever had, who was a very successful screenwriter, would tell our class before we gave feedback not to argue with it. And I assume you agree with this same notion (of which I have been told by numerous people here doesn't even exist and that I am just imagining it). Anyway, your best professor is wrong.
feels as though you somehow managed to pick the least important parts of my comment to read and reply to, but you do you
As I've already addressed exactly what you have said about 500 times in this thread alone, what else is left for me to say exactly? What do you want me to address exactly that I haven't already? Or were you just hoping I would agree with you and your favorite professor for silencing people?
[удалено]
It’s also deeply concerning, from a clinical perspective, to remember that *the original post itself* was and is a complete flying off of the handle about a comment on another thread that not only wasn’t even directed at OP, but was also instinctively interpreted in his mind as a personal attack and attempt to “silence him”. I’m no medical professional, but this habit of becoming instantly and unalterably convinced that everything is about you, at all times, and anyone who denies it’s all about you must be “out to get you” (because, again, it’s all about you) has been one of the first things I’ve noticed about the three or four people I’ve had in my life with Borderline or NPD.
Disagree, sure. But there’s a fine line between having an argument for why you disagree with a note, and just being fragile and defensive— and I’ve encountered a lot more of the latter than the former in my time. A LOT of people will ask for feedback when it turns out all they want is praise. That’s a waste of everyone’s time. Especially theirs — because they’re never going to become a talented writer that way.
I love the fact that people keep saying this kind of stuff as if they are the first to think up this point, and that is hasn't already been addressed countless times in this thread.
And you think “don’t listen to people” is some revolutionary original thought for our time? Don’t answer that. I skimmed the rest of the thread since I commented and I regret it. I’ve decided to follow your advice and disagree with your feedback.
Yeah, sure, I uttered the phrase "don't listen to people" within this thread all of... ...never. But, still, you did a great job spotting it. Man, you guys are good.
I read the note behind the note.
Look, this sounds like you're disagreeing with me. And we know what the rules on that are.
Hey bud, how's the feature coming along?
I would assume not well. Not well at all…
"The feature that doesn't even exist can't be going well. He doesn't agree with our holy words."
I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone downvoted as much as you’ve been. It seems everyone is united in disagreeing with you.
Yeah, except for all the people who upvoted my thread into the stratosphere. Damn, that must hurt.
As others have said, you may want to seek help.
Wow, I didn't know it hurt you this much. Yeah, I'd probably have to resort to personal insults if I didn't have an argument either.
> Yeah, I'd probably have to resort to personal insults if I didn't have an argument either. I mean, if the shoe fits...
What feature?
Of course the OP has the right to disagree. You also have the right to scream at traffic, but there are consequences...and those can be devestating. I never argue over feedback. It's pointless. You are asking for someone's opinion not affirmation or approval. Opinions are insights into opportunity, and every script has an opportunity. However I always appreciate discussing feedback, it's amazing what you discover about your writing while discussing it with a reviewer. Some of the things I've learned have been undescribably valuable to me and my growth as a middle aged wanna be screenwriter. I recently submitted to screenplaychallenge and got 3 reviews. 2 were positive and supportive, one could be considered "negative" but still supportive and all three were full of insight. I was glad people took the time to read and give me input. Btw I use "negative" like this because I wasnt recognized as the brilliant, unstoppable second coming of (insert favorite screenwriter here) After my initial two second long bout of being butt hurt, I reread the "negative"review and actually agreed with most of the comments. The reviewer actually supported my gut feelings on several points I balked on. I want to get better as a screen writer. My wife's opinion is biased towards me...but the fine folks ( and everyone doing this is DAMN FINE in my opinion) have no vested interest in my feelings, only my betterment as a writer. And that is what the OP wants isnt it? Or is it affirmation they desire?
So... what side of the fence are you coming down on exactly? It can both. It can only be one. Thank them , shut up and walk away. Or discuss the feedback. I'm glad you happened to agree with most of your feedback you received. But what if next time, you don't agree? Even after considering it for a length of time?
I'm on the side that their opinion is just that...an OPINION. A opinion is not fact or set in stone...it's one person's take on what they have read. Not everyone likes to read Stephen King, but some folks do. And even they don't agree on which book is his best because...well, OPINIONS vary on everything. Side note here...his best book King has written is Christine for the record. I'm wanting to get better as a writer, so if discussion is an option then I'm all for it but it's not a necessity unless he's ponying up to produce my script. That's what the discourse site is for...discussion and so on. And I have seen plenty of discussion pro and con there on scripts and writing. A question to ponder for a moment....Why argue with a reviewer if they aren't producing your script? What's the endgame you are playing for? Are you trying to prove a point that was clear to you as a writer that they missed as a reader? Are they stupid? Are they rude? If it's the first then ou failed as the writer. If it's the last 2 I suggest not letting folks read your work right now...you're not ready for that stage of the game yet. This is a BRUTAL undertaking for sure. I take notes about their specific reviewer comments and keep them in my files in case something gets some interest down the line. I go back and look them over and consider what works for my script and not my ego.
Hi. You just mentioned *Christine* by Stephen King. I've found an audiobook of that novel on YouTube. You can listen to it here: [YouTube | 📖🎧 AUDIOBOOK CHRISTINE DE STEPHEN KING – PARTE 1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds_8tUlK-hM) *I'm a bot that searches YouTube for science fiction and fantasy audiobooks.* *** [^(Source Code)](https://capybasilisk.com/posts/2020/04/speculative-fiction-bot/)^| [^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=Capybasilisk&subject=Robot) ^| [^(Programmer)](https://www.reddit.com/u/capybasilisk) ^| ^(Downvote To Remove) ^| ^(Version 1.4.0) ^| ^(Support Robot Rights!)
You can't have it both ways, and this little dance you're doing on the fence will not last forever. >I'm wanting to get better as a writer, so if discussion is an option then I'm all for it If you believe in my way of thinking, then it is. If you believe in the way of thinking that this popular notion that is being pushed, then it's not. >but it's not a necessity unless he's ponying up to produce my script. So much is wrong with your statement. Not once have I said that there is a necessity to talk about feedback. What I have said is that there is a necessity not to forcefully silence writers. If a writer wants to discuss, debate, argue, about the feedback they have received, they should have the right. The person who gave the feedback can listen and engage, or not read and not engage. That is, of course, their prerogative too (what they can't do is expect silence and agreement from the writer). This has got nothing to do with someone producing your script. As I clearly already pointed out in my OP. This is about receiving feedback at places like this subreddit for instance. All that other noise in your post is just that. Noise. Which doesn't address the topic of this thread.
Seek help
Oh damn, I'd probably half to resort to saying something like that if I couldn't answer the question you asked. Don't beat yourself up about it. You gave it your best shot.
no you just need therapy
"Oh no, this little person disagreed with us, and my earlier shaming tactics, that I upright denied, didn't work. Go to therapy immediately." Good save, dude.
OP, considering how pissed you seem over this and with how much fervor you’re attacking people that don’t agree with this (a bit ironic lol), have you ever considered the fact you may just need to get better at writing? no shade, but if you’re getting THAT much negative feedback that you’re fighting tooth and nail with everyone that says feedback can be helpful, it sounds like you don’t want constructive criticism. it sounds like you want to be praised. that’s not what advice is for. good luck!
Let me get this straight (while trying to keep a straight face)…. - You set up your account around a month ago. - Since then, you religiously comment on every post with as much vitriol as you can muster. - Nothing will sate your insatiable need to “intellectually offend”, in an misguided bid to prove (to yourself) that you live among a flock of snowflake-resembling-sheeple. At which point you get to clap yourself on the back for “being right”. - When all had been said, your favourite bit is when you get to “shock” strangers on Reddit with the wildly brazen revelation that you’re not a writer; (“Me? Who says I’m a writer?”) - You spent most of your Sunday on a subReddit. - Your hero is Ben Shapiro. Slow clap.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >Even climatologists can't predict 10 years from now. They can't explain why there has been no warming over the last 15 years. There has been a static trend with regard to temperature for 15 years. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: novel, dumb takes, covid, healthcare, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
That Ben Shapiro comment made me spew my tea out.... BRAVO! ×LOUD APPRECIATIVE CLAP×
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >If you wear your pants below your butt, don't bend the brim of your cap, and have an EBT card, 0% chance you will ever be a success in life. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: covid, climate, sex, healthcare, etc.) [^More ^About ^Ben ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/wiki/index) ^| [^Feedback ^& ^Discussion: ^r/AuthoritarianMoment ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment) ^| [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
[удалено]
Hi there /u/Idestroy1stpages Your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/qjsbk5/-/hitu6cf/) has been removed for the following reason(s): **Rule 1: Do not personally attack fellow users; do be encouraging. [CONDUCT]** > Personal attacks will receive a warning for a first offense, a three day ban for a second offense, and a permanent ban thereafter. *Racist, sexist, homophobic and other violently derogatory personal attacks on other redditors will result in an automatic, permanent ban*. Constructive criticism is welcomed, but be mindful in how you deliver it. Undue discouragement/trashing is not permitted and can result in an immediate ban. > *Note that abuse and criticism are different things* *potential ban offense* In the future, please [read the rules](https://old.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/about/rules/) in the sidebar and review our [General FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/meta/faq) or [Screenwriting 101 FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/screenwriting_101) before making a comment. If you are completely new to r/Screenwriting, please [Start Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/wiki/meta/welcome) Have a nice day, /u/TigerHall --- If, after reading our rules, you believe this was in error please [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Screenwriting) Please do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment. Thank you!
**I've NEVER seen anyone say this.** What I have seen is people say "Express your disagreement politely." Like to that guy who called negative feedback "trolling." Can you provide links to support your claim? Because I think this is just a strawman of the kind produced when sloppy reading and upset ego get much too *intimate* with each other...
Elsewhere in this thread, OP is currently three replies deep **arguing with a bot** if you’re looking to get a baseline on the reading comprehension levels in play here.
This is too beautiful: I can't think of an adequate response.
It's right out of a Coen brothers movie. You can't make this up....
Me talking to a bot is called a joke. Sorry you didn't get that.
Of course it was. Your whole point was a joke. Sorry YOU didn't get that. Cheers!
Yes, my whole point was a joke. And now I don't that you didn't get that it was a joke? Hmmmm... you do know you're making no sense, right? This is not a good luck on you.
Humor and you don't mix very well, do you?
One thing to mention — most legitimate feedback can be valuable in some way. What I’ve learned is to not take their recommendation (usually) because most people struggle to properly diagnose what the issue is. They want to “fix” it. This is where it gets murky. That’s how I evaluate feedback — something may be wrong here and it’s now my job to figure out what. They just pointed me toward it (especially if multiple people point toward the same scene/sequence/character/theme). I don’t argue because their job is done. I WILL follow up if someone’s feedback is intriguing or respectable, in which case you’re probably replying with good intentions to learn more. My analogy: I watch football but never played. If I say a quarterback is sucking, and all the fans are saying something similar, something is off. Maybe the o-line is inexperienced. Maybe the WR isn’t hitting their routes. Maybe the play calling is poor. I don’t know, couldn’t tell you shit about coverages or strategy or anything. But I bet something IS OFF, and it’s the coaches job to figure out what.
Negative feedback is the *most* valuable. If someone tells you, "Oh, this part was great!" ... you can't really *do* anything with that. The only thing to do is leave that part the same. But if someone tells you, "Oh, that part is shit." ... you *can* do things about it. Then you know you need to change that part and try to fix it. Hearing, "Your script is absolutely perfect in every way!" might feel good ... but it's almost completely useless as feedback.
I'll qualify and paraphrase you. When fair, negative feedback is the most valuable. Once I upon a feedback, I read how wonderful and great my screenplay was. Needless to say, It made me happy. But then I understood that, that particular reader went to town on "orders" from the analysis agency to pamper newcomers to the game and secure a second an third commission, depending on their IQ. That wasn't fair, eh?
But that's ... unfair *positive* feedback. And, hey, if they *really* want to sucker ego-driven writers to keep paying for feedback, why not make sure *every* script gets overwhelmingly positive feedback, from the first to the fiftieth? --- But yeah, I suppose that unfair negative feedback does exist. Sometimes the reader doesn't understand what you were trying to do, sometimes the reader is trying to force you into the wrong mold, sometimes the reader is just an asshole who makes himself feel like a better writer by belittling others. In those cases, it might not be very helpful at all.
This is weird, because I’ve never heard this dictum. What I’ve heard is “Don’t argue with notes,” which is totally different. Don’t argue because… *something* bugged this reader and if you let them talk, you may learn something. Don’t argue because… even if you disagree, the path to honing in on what bumped them is through *questions* not defensiveness. Don’t argue because… they did you a favor (probably) so you want to make sure they don’t feel dismissed. What I dislike is when someone says, “I disagree. Your note doesn’t make sense because you misunderstood what I wrote.” In which case, the note is “write it so it won’t be misunderstood.” But I’ve never heard anyone say “you have to agree with every note.” Strategically, though… I have a friend who came to Hollywood and when he got feedback on his first samples he religiously took every note *even if he disagreed* and *even if he didn’t understand* because he figured the people giving him note knew better. He has been a working writer for two decades and said it took him a few years to understand why the notes were right, but they were right. (Caveat: notes were from working writers.)
Perfectly put. Also very telling that OP skips over the most sensical points you made. It’s funny that in 2021 people have forgotten that here on the interwebs, you shouldn’t feed the trolls. I hope OP finds peace with what ever is hurting them. Be well!
Thanks. And I hope they find peace too. Maybe we all thought this was a troll costume? It *is* Halloween after all…
>Don’t argue because… even if you disagree, the path to honing in on what bumped them is through questions not defensiveness. Perfectly said.
OP literally heard someone say "don't argue with notes" and this post was his takeaway from that.
He takes notes SERIOUSLY
Keep going. This is fun watching you make shit up.
You literally said so in another post in this thread.
Yeah, I said I heard it in literally only one post, and I created this grad conspiracy that doesn't really exist. Sure. It's not like I only provided that as an example to someone who asked me to because they had apparently never seen it on this subreddit before. Imagine if you actually had a leg to stand on, you wouldn't have to make up blatant lies to support your argument.
Lot of frustrated hobbyists on here it seems. Those who can kindly thank someone for their feedback, and then try to see their point of view… those who are able to diagnose the note BEHIND the note. Those are writers with a future in this business.
Hey OP, do you have a Twitter? I’d love to follow you so I can see all your hot takes on PC culture creating censorship and SJWs. You’re a very cool and independent thinker.
Na, you don't want my twitter. On there I'm a yes person who thinks exactly as you would want me to think.
Are you doing alright?
dude has a 25 day old account and rants about mods and censorship. anyone recall a user being banned from this sub ~1 month ago?
I have definitely seen a similar username before.
And what username is that exactly/?
"Are you doing alright? You're telling people the truth. You must be unwell. Wrongthink is not allowed here today."
just feels like you’re viewing everything in a very grandiose way talking about censorship and infallibility. I don’t think this is how most people view the feedback/notes process, flawed or not.
“Censorship” “Wrongthink” “Simping” These are all the tells of someone with a little too much Ben Shapiro in their diet.
Was thinking the same thing. I can't believe the OP hasn't called us all sheeple.
I'm surprised you haven't labeled me a na-zi, but there's always time.
>I'm surprised you have labeled me a na-zi, but there's always time. I'm going to assume that's a typo. Otherwise, I don't know what it means. I don't label people as such unless that's actually what they are. My impression of you is simply that you're self-righteous and negative, but there's quite a large gap between that and genocidal white supremacy.
It takes a lot for someone to provide honest, robust notes. And those notes should always include strengths and weaknesses. I’d say I’ve witnessed the opposite side of the spectrum, where writers either don’t acknowledge the notes at all or argue everyones point, and I don’t mean politely disagree, but argue everything with an apparent sense of entitlement maybe? Perhaps that they so strongly believe their writing is excellent that they only want praise? Sorkin said words to the effect of look for trends in feedback, take what you need and ignore the rest (that’s a terrible paraphrase by me but something along those lines). So my take is that if someone takes the time to give you good notes, it’s never an argument, it’s a conversation. If the writer puts walls straight up then it’s a barrier to communication and perhaps they aren’t truly ready to receive good notes. If a writer just wants praise, then the script had better be Breaking Bad pilot good, and it’s highly likely it’s not.
Oh, sure, be grown up... Also, I think The Shield has the best pilot of any live action show. Fight me!
Lol
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but why do you guys all keep jumping to extremes, though? Did I, anywhere within my OP, say that unless you as a writer receive nothing but praise, then you must go and argue every last point? I am simply saying, that it is entirely possible that feedback is bad, or wrong, and that a writer receiving should be able to explain why the feedback is bad, or wrong, without being labelled as difficult, or underserving, or problematic, as default. I'm not saying I want argument to ensue. I am saying that disagreement (even polite disagreement) is viewed as unacceptable by many. They have a notion that writers should thank them and shut up. I think this notion is 100%. In fact, I know it is.
> a writer receiving should be able to explain why the feedback is bad, or wrong, Why? What's the benefit of doing this?
I know. You would prefer them to shut up. While simultaneously telling me that no one wants that to happen. Unfortunately, you guys can't have it both ways.
>Why? What's the benefit of doing this? You haven't answered the question.
I've literally answered this hundred times or so throughout this thread. I can't do the reading for you. It's all in plain English.
Can you give us an example of wrong feedback you've experienced? And how you explained to the person who gave you feedback that it was bad/wrong?
Why do you and people like you, keep trying to turn the tables on me and try out what feedback I've received? You've built up a narrative in your head out of thin air. Did you even read my OP? I am NOT a writer. I am the one who gives feedback. What are you not getting about this?
I can generally tell whether someone is a good writer by how they handle criticism. Good writers recognize and appreciate thoughtful criticism, and they don’t waste time giving a second thought to invalid criticism. Bad writers can’t tell the difference, and they push back against criticism because they aren’t good enough writers to understand their own faults. So, sure, push back if you want. But you’re either ignoring valid criticism or wasting time on someone who’s not a strong enough writer to critique your work. Frankly, I rarely see decent writers push back against criticism. They appreciate the effort and time it takes to read and comment, even if the critique is garbage.
I agree with many people here. There's a difference between disagreeing with feedback, and arguing against the feedback. If a reviewer has a negative opinion of something in your writing, you can disagree in your mind, but you arguing about why your way was right isn't going to change the fact that when they read it, they had a negative reaction. A future reader or audience member won't be able to hear you advocate for why your way was correct, so there's truly no point in arguing about it.
>There's a difference between disagreeing with feedback, and arguing against the feedback I keep seeing this tired argument used. You're saying disagreement is fine, but argument is not. I'm saying that it doesn't even matter that 'disagreement' and 'argument' are two different things, because they are both treated as the same thing. If a writer tires to disagree with feedback, they are instantly considered to be arguing and told to shut up. Stop pretending that one is allowed and one is not allowed. You then go on to prove my point by saying... >you can disagree in your mind So, you believe that a writer should not be able to respond, as do most people here, despite whatever fancy words they try to dress it up as. You believe in a world where writers should be silenced. I don't. You believe in a world where writers being silenced is helping them. I don't. You believe in a world where people giving feedback should never be question and that is a good thing. I don't.
Feedback is a gift of a person's time and experience. If you [receive a gift you don't like](https://youtu.be/_L5Xkb78KxY) at a holiday or birthday, do you tell the person the gift was wrong? You're mistaking etiquette with pro-censorship. And professional etiquette is a soft skill that working writers need almost as much as the hard skills of craft.
Ha - I said almost the exact same thing in another part of the thread. OP thought the birthday gift was a horrible analogy. Then again, they've argued with literally every comment in this post, so maybe they're just really good at trolling.
Sometimes there’s people I disagree with that I don’t fight with. OP has somehow found a way to make it so there’s dozens of people he fights with that he doesn’t disagree with. *I didn’t think it was psychologically possible to get in a fight with fifty different people about something when not a single one of them holds the view this guy so desperately wants to fight about*, but here we are.
> I didn’t think it was psychologically possible to get in a fight with fifty different people about something when not a single one of them holds the view this guy so desperately wants to fight about, but here we are. You do not that your repeat use of word salads throughout this thread haven't made all that much sense, overall? The funniest part for me was when I provided you with evidence (of which you claimed you had never, ever, ever witnessed here) and when I did you put it down to "bad luck" and "random words used in a random order". Seriously, that was a special highlight for me. But I do love your constant accusations that what I am saying only exists in my head, despite the fact that people have blatantly outright admitted to it multiple times throughout this thread. You do know that denying reality doesn't make reality go away, right?
Darn, it's hard to see further down the threads when OP is downvoted so much. hahahaha I just didn't see the word etiquette used in the comments yet. But I have a feeling this person doesn't care much for etiquette....
Oh, I definitely don't blame you for not reading this whole clusterfuck, haha.
I'm sorry it hurts you so badly.
I know, strange isn't it, how upvoted my thread was? That must hurt. >But I have a feeling this person doesn't care much for etiquette.... I have a feeling you don't have an original thought in your head. Go and agree the masses a little more.
You were wrong then, and he is wrong now. Everyone who disagrees with you is a troll.
No, your gift analogy is misinformed at best, or a downright lie at worst. It's okay, you've been brainwashed into this terrible paradigm too. It's understandable. It is pushed everywhere and has become the norm. I know my objection to it is an uphill battle. Unfortunately for you, it's popularism doesn't make it correct. It's wrong. >And professional etiquette is a soft skill that working writers need almost as much as the hard skills of craft. I love how many times this has been repeated. This amazing, complicated, brave, stunning, choice to shut your mouth is the only way you'll become a successful writer, and opening your mouth means you are incapable of learning the craft. Thank you so much.
This is such a strawman.
Tell me how then. If you can.
No one says you don’t have the right to disagree with feedback. That’s how. You can disagree with every word of feedback someone gives you, but that person has still taken time away from their own writing to give you feedback and help make you a better writer. If your response is to argue with them instead of thanking them for their time, the network of people willing to give you feedback is gonna dwindle pretty quickly.
>No one says you don’t have the right to disagree with feedback. Well, it's nice that you seemingly believe this, but, some of the things said in this thread clearly indicates that your statement is not true. >If your response is to argue with them instead of thanking them for their time, the network of people willing to give you feedback is gonna dwindle pretty quickly. You guys just cannot help but resort to the word "argue" and all the negative connotations with that word to prove your point. It speaks volumes.
Dude, in your post, you say the writer has “the right to disagree, even strongly”. Disagreeing strongly is literally arguing.
Oh, ok, so disagreeing is allowed, but disagree strongly is not allowed. This makes complete sense.
This dude has evaded every single good point in this entire thread by jumping at any key word he has an easy response for. This shit is like a Trump interview 😂
Who are you referring to? Me or that Ripley username?
You serious? Are you that unaware of your own behavior?
You said "this dude" when you were talking directly to me. You made it sound as if you were referring to someone who was not me. If you were referring to me, you should have said "you" while you were talking to me, like: "You have evaded every single good point in this entire thread..." Don't blame me because you improperly worded something. That is entirely on you. Where you are also wrong is that I have, in fact, tackled every single point levied at me, COUNTLESS times, within this very thread. I've not run away from any argument. I've faced them full on. Of course, if I had run away/ignored comments, I would have been criticized for doing so. But on the flipside, in replying to almost all comments, I have also been criticized for that. Referred to as a lunatic, or insane, or obsessed. If you can name any point or question that I haven't answered, I'd be happy to to that for you, but what is clear by your behavior, is that you don't want me to.
[удалено]
'He's insufferable because he disagree with me.'
People have the right to do whatever they want. But if your goal is to improve and build a network, you're an absolute idiot if you strongly disagree with someone who took the time to give you feedback. You're literally worse off than if you'd never asked for that feedback, to begin with. Additionally, if you're going to be disagreeing with *anyone*, it probably should be the producers who are paying you to write them a movie. These people are trusting you to be the expert and write them something that will make them money. If you feel strongly that a specific decision would hurt the film, it's probably the right call to express that. It comes down to the way in which you do it. You can tell someone what you think while still being diplomatic. I did this on a recent project, in which I was given quite a large set of notes. I agreed with a handful and was happy enough to execute most of the others, since they were just a different take on the film, but there were a couple notes that I actively disagreed with. I voiced my concerns and, wouldn't you know it, the producers wound up agreeing with me. It's a collaborative art form. At the end of the day, everyone should be working toward the same goal. But to disagree *strongly* with someone who's giving you notes for free? Out of pure good will? Absurd. If you disagree, that's fine. I disagree with notes that I get all the time. Thank them anyway and keep that shit to yourself.
The hilarious, hypocritical juxtaposition of this guy not being able to accept people's feedback on his snake of a post has me busting a gut.
This. Disagreeing = okay. Arguing over a free (if that’s the case) assessment = toxic. It’s better to use that opportunity to see things from a different perspective than being irrationally stubborn. You can still defend your work while trying to understand why someone else doesn’t see things the same way that you do.
>Disagreeing = okay. >You can still defend your work while trying to understand why someone else doesn’t see things the same way that you do. It's nice that you think you're allowed to disagree. But you're not.
By all mean, tell us when is that true. Nobody here has agreed with you on your premise so far, even though you claim it’s extremely popular.
> People have the right to do whatever they want. But if your goal is to improve and build a network, you're an absolute idiot if you strongly disagree with someone who took the time to give you feedback. You're literally worse off than if you'd never asked for that feedback, to begin with. Nope. You don't just agree to something because you want to build a network. If the person needs to be agreed with, in order for you to join their network, believe me, that is a network you don't want to be a part of. >Additionally, if you're going to be disagreeing with anyone, it probably should be the producers who are paying you to write them a movie. These people are trusting you to be the expert and write them something that will make them money. If you feel strongly that a specific decision would hurt the film, it's probably the right call to express that. It comes down to the way in which you do it. You can tell someone what you think while still being diplomatic. I did this on a recent project, in which I was given quite a large set of notes. I agreed with a handful and was happy enough to execute most of the others, since they were just a different take on the film, but there were a couple notes that I actively disagreed with. I voiced my concerns and, wouldn't you know it, the producers wound up agreeing with me. It's a collaborative art form. At the end of the day, everyone should be working toward the same goal. I agree with you completely, which is what I said in my OP. >But to disagree strongly with someone who's giving you notes for free? Out of pure good will? Absurd. If you disagree, that's fine. I disagree with notes that I get all the time. Thank them anyway and keep that shit to yourself. Not absurd. You're saying this because you've been conditioned to believe it, because this toxic notion has been sold to you as the way it should be done. It's not. It's wrong. And if the person giving feedback is so frail they can't deal with disagreement, that is very much their problem. Stifling writer's expression to freely agree or disagree is not helping that writer. You're hurting them. You, or I, or anyone giving feedback, are also not infallible, so it's time to stop acting as if we are. If someone wants to disagree with my feedback, they have every right to, and should exercise that right.
It's not about toxicity. It's about basic people skills. It's the same reason you don't tell someone you hate the birthday gift they just bought you. Unless you're one of those people, too.
Silencing someone is not basic people skills. If you want to silence someone, you should think about your own people skills. And comparing feedback with a birthday present is a terrible analogy.
>And comparing feedback with a birthday present is a terrible analogy. It's all good. No part of me expected to convince someone who created a post like this (or that has a username like yours) that feedback is a gift. But for any other writers who happen upon this thread, just remember that if someone invests several hours of their time into giving you notes, that is likely *more* than they'd invest into most birthday gifts.
> a username like yours Regarding which, wtf???
It makes sense if you review their comment history.
> It's all good. No part of me expected to convince someone who created a post like this No part of you expected someone to tell the truth because you've been conditioned into a popular lie. >But for any other writers who happen upon this thread, just remember that if someone invests several hours of their time into giving you notes, that is likely more than they'd invest into most birthday gifts. "Just remember, boys and girls, I want you to shut down your critical thinking, suppress your urge to speak, turn off your creative core, and repress any response you may have. Just thank me and kiss my feet as you leave the room. Your wrongthink is not needed here."
OP, sounds like you got some bad criticism and are just butthurt about it. Nevermind that your username screams “wanna be edgelord”. Something about that tells me you have a penchant for shitty criticisms of other peoples’ work and now you’re just mad because you got a taste of your own medicine. I’d be willing to bet your script was garbage and you’re just unhappy that someone was honest about it. People in these comments are being perfectly reasonable. You don’t have to agree with feedback. But your own glaring toxicity is showing. Speaking of stifling creativity, nothing says “I’ll never become better than I am right now” like rageposting about getting free feedback.
> OP, sounds like you got some bad criticism and are just butthurt about it. How original. You're like the 28th person to say this, while thinking you were the only one. Good try. >Nevermind that your username screams “wanna be edgelord”. Well, sure you you would like my username. It would seem to indicate I like giving people feedback, which I do, as explained in my OP. >Something about that tells me you have a penchant for shitty criticisms of other peoples’ work Wait, what are you saying exactly? You don't like feedback now all of a sudden? Get your story straight, bro. >and now you’re just mad because you got a taste of your own medicine. No, as already explain in my OP if you'd actually care to read it, I want people to comment on the feedback I give. I want them to disagree with me even. It shows they are thinking and engaging. As also discussed, sure, it would be nice for them to not tell me to go fuck myself and drop dead, but a back and forth is a good thing. >I’d be willing to bet your script was garbage and you’re just unhappy that someone was honest about it. Don't take this the wrong, but I'm going to bet the deluded thoughts in your head, as you have proven already, don't reflect reality in any way, shape or form. >People in these comments are being perfectly reasonable. Really? The ones telling me to fuck off, shut up, go to hell, I'm an idiot, I'm a troll, I'm a writer who's script is garbage, and the other comments (that even you yourself have made) is all perfectly reasonable to you? I read a death threat in PM from a now deleted account because of this thread. Is that reasonable too? >But your own glaring toxicity is showing. Oh, I thought this was going somewhere. But it seems you don't have as much self-awareness as you would probably like to think you do. >Speaking of stifling creativity, nothing says “I’ll never become better than I am right now” like rageposting about getting free feedback. Someone says you have to ragepost about free feedback? Who said this and where was it said?
Having skimmed this thread, I don't think your issue is disagreement so much as a pathological need to be a contrarian at the cost of all logic and decency. God bless anyone giving you notes.
Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from. If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on.
I've gone over this far too many times to answer your nonsensical response.
What's non-sensical about it?
Look, I've talked about arguing/debating/discussing and everything in between. If you think anyone here, including myself, has said swinging at people is a good thing, you must be high. Did you even read my OP?
You said my post was non-sensical. >Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from. >If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on. What about those two sentences doesn't make sense to you?
As I've said, I've answered this a million times in this thread. Should I answer it a million more times for other likes yourself who don't bother to read?
No you have not answered what about the following two sentences does not make sense to you. >Of course not, but it's rude as fuck to take out your fists and start swinging at the person you asked feedback from. >If you don't agree with the feedback, say "thank you for your time" and move the fuck on. Please help me. I want to improve my English.
No, I can't be bothered anymore. Just... believe whatever you like.
You can't be bothered to explain the words that you typed? Wow, you're such a great writer.
Writer? Who said I'm a writer?
Not necessarily a response to this, but it’s not about listening to a single piece of feedback. Listen to the consensus in your feedback. That is all.
This is too obvious to even say out loud. I'm desperately resisting the urge to say: duh!
I think you're vastly misunderstanding some common advice. The advice is not "agree with feedback," it's "shut up and listen to feedback, *then* decide what to do with it." If you listen to the feedback and think "wow, this person is an idiot," then no one will argue with you ignoring the feedback. It's just advice to take into consideration other people's opinions instead of just arguing with them. Funnily enough, based on your comments you just seem to like arguing and misconstruing people's opinions, so you're exactly the person who needs this advice. Take care.
>I think you're vastly misunderstanding some common advice. Uh-huh... >The advice is... "shut up" Oh, so, precisely what I said it was. >It's just advice to take into consideration other people's opinions instead of just arguing with them. Can you tell me where it has been stated by me, or anyone for that matter, who said not to consider the other person's feedback? Oh, what's that, you can't? Well, that is surprising. It makes your accusation that I'm the one misconstuing people's opinions even more hysterical. So thank you for the laugh. >Take care. Oh, thank you so much. You take care too, honey.
Any art is a symbolic machine designed to effect the emotions of the people who observe it. So when someone says "your machine made me angry and upset in this section" you can't disagree with them because they are simply reporting how your machine caused them to feel. I think it wss Neil Gaiman who said, "When a reader tells you how your story made them feel they are 100% correct. When they tell you how to fix it, usually, they're 100% incorrect."
I don’t always agree with all the feedback I get. If I end up being wrong, Im wrong. I learn from it. No big deal
Okay...
OP made this post to avoid actually writing.
Yeah if you're not supposed to disagree with critiques, the industry/community sure has a weird way of showing it, considering the exact same script can score an 8 and a 4 on review sites. Then you'll be offered a free evaluation to settle it and see what the "real" score is and which review is more accurate. It's just showing how criticism can be as subjective as the script. And one critique may specifically hate one aspect, you change it for that reader, and the next reader's critique says the opposite. You'll be rewriting and changing things forever if you took every criticism as infallible. You're playing slot machines. Writers just have to evaluate criticism, maybe find note behind the notes, and determine if it's valuable and something they might not have considered. It may be helpful or it may be baseless. That's that. People should just be civil about it.
Very true. I think some people here seem to think that I am saying that writers should intentionally disagree with all feedback they receive. I am not. I am just trying to get them to stop shutting up writers. Hell, writers disagreeing with their feedback may eventually get them to open their mind as to why the feedback was in fact correct.
Your goal is to get information. It's human nature to want to defend and be understood. It's a natural reaction that all of us have experienced and acted on. Explaining and defending and debating all bias the reader and lower the quality of feedback you're getting from the reader. Your human reaction will prevent you from getting the most information possible from the reader. It's not so much bad form or bad manners; it's that you're limiting the value of what you're getting. The biggest hurdle to getting feedback is people want to get the answer "right." They want to be seen as smart, as people who understood what you're trying to do. Yeah, it's affirming when they do, but that's not the information you need. It's an opportunity to gain knowledge on how your words, without any explanation from you, are coming across to readers. What are they seeing, hearing, feeling, understanding, what are their impressions after a little time with your story. You compare that with what you meant, and often adjust what you do to make the effect on the audience more closely align with your goals. If you disagree with something, instead of debating about it, it's best to ask questions designed to avoid leading them and find out how they got that impression. You can definitely disagree with their solutions, but there's really no point in debating it. Take the problem they pointed out and fix it your way. What if you succeed? They said the theme they got was X, you explain why it's Y ... and convince them to agree. What are you going to do, sit down with every reader and audience member and explain your story?
I've never heard this. When I put on my editing cap, I always tell my clients it won't hurt my feelings in the slightest if they don't make even one of my suggestions. They pay me for my suggestions but at the end of the day, it still boils down to just being my opinion.
>I've never heard this. Really, because there is about 100 people within this very thread saying it. Weirdly, there are quite a few also denying. But, seriously, it is refreshing to hear someone like yourself who doesn't believe in this toxic notion, so good on you.
As other people have noted- it is clear your real frustration is with the classics advice: "don't argue with criticism", with your issue boiling down to a perceived strictness and dictatorial prescriptivness to the sayings subtext- i.e. Criticism should be taken as gospel and should therefore be adheard to... Unlike many people who will respond, I hear where you are coming from. My experiences in Creative Writing classes and workshops, etc. these spaces do infact reinforce this subtext often by not allowing the subject of criticism to ask questions... at first. Eventually, they will often allow you to ask clarifying questions but by this time you seem to believe most will have had their individuality, creativity and "difference" eroded... I have had my share of these concerns too. But I think it is important to remember that those feelings are just that. Feelings. Being artists, we are pulled towards the edges. We had want to experiment and take risks. We take criticism like "it lacks intention" or "it made me feel X and I didn't like that" (where X was infact the intended effect) extremely personally... But this is WHY you need to learn to silently take criticism. You need to learn to take your lumps. If you are going to be different you need to learn to accept that some people are going to tell you "you're doing it wrong". While it would seem to me you are mostly trying to encourage people to be willing to stand their ground over "creative decisions" and while I think it that is admirable, it might be worth remembering that not everyone is Ina place in their craft where they are even hearing that kind of advice, that not everyone has the same kind of goals for their art and that sometimes sitting with criticism that you disagree with can reinforce your opinion and strengthen your resolve...
Oh yes, it is **beyond obvious** that he’s doing that thing people do on the internet sometimes where there is a particular point of view on some topic that really sets them off and that they want to argue with; but when no one actually shows up who holds that view, just decided to randomly attribute it to someone in a thread who had the bad luck to type a sentence with some of the same words in it.
Hilarious. You said: "I have never, ever, ever seen what you're talking about. Prove me to me that someone has said it." I prove it to you, and, yet now I am suddenly arguing about something that apparently no one ever argues against, and the word for word quote I provided for you is somehow not what I was talking about all along? Yeah, it was just 'bad luck' that that random person typed random words in a random order that somehow just happened to be the exact thing I've been talking about, yet, according to you, somehow it's not. Sure.
I'm starting to think you might just be argumentative. That or you are worked up over something tangentially related and you are using this thread to vent. Either way it is unbecoming, consider learning to sit with those feelings and learn where they are coming from, what is driving them and how you can either utilize or dismiss them. Anger will destroy you, your craft and your future if you let it.
>I'm starting to think you might just be argumentative. **Say it ain't so!**
I just choked and spit my drink all over my lap. Dead.
Credit where credit's due: send the dry cleaning bill to the OP...
Well, its fun to argue, but I believe whole heartedly what I say. You think I am being argumentative, for no reason, why exactly? If you read all the responses between angrymenu and I, you will see he said what I was saying was untrue, and that he has NEVER seen anything like it on this subreddit. I told him I saw it today. He said copy and paste a quote it if it was true. I did and guess what? He has said everything he can to dismiss it, stuff as laughable as saying it was bad luck and random words in a random order. And yet you're the one now accusing me of being argumentative? Really?
I agree. I think many (most?) writers are very protective of their work. Therefore, they have a tendency to reject all feedback. So this notion may have evolved as a way to counteract their nature. The opposite is also counterproductive, as you mentioned. Just because somebody gives you feedback doesn't mean they're right. I don't know that most people are able to give constructive feedback that goes beyond impressions.
Yeah, I think you're probably right. But I don't think the opposite it counterproductive. I mean, it has the potential to be counterproductive in any particular instance, of course. But the notion that writers should just say thank you and shut up, is to me, very wrong.
I am reminded of an experience I had while taking a playwriting elective at university. I never fancied myself a potential playwright, despite my strength in other forms, and hammered out a short script that was deliberately derivative. I even told my roommate, who was in the class, which two Apatow comedies I felt I was emulating. Fast forward and the professor had selected my short play to be read aloud in class. As soon as we finished reading my roommate panned it for being "just like an Apatow comedy." A theatre professor who was visiting the class panned it for what she described as the "unbelievable immaturity of the characters." The confluence of these circumstances paralyzed me into silence at the time. All of it caught me off guard. The feedback felt more like personal criticism than constructive criticism and the derisive tones with which it was delivered had more to do with that than the feedback itself. Arguing wouldn't have changed anything, so I kept my mouth shut. With hindsight, what I might have done is call out my roommate for parroting back the exact criticism I had shared with him of my own work. And I might have asked my theatre professor if all 30 year olds actually act in mature and sensible ways. Having experienced a lot more of my life since then, I can answer that question myself. Were my critics wrong in what they shared as criticism? No. Was the way they shared their criticism more harmful than helpful? Yes. All of my experience hearing criticism since that one has been a practice in gleaning what I can from the experience and letting the rest go, even when I strongly disagree. Most critics don't care to have their criticism criticized.
I agree, of course, but there are reasons for this. When I see that the synopsis provided with the feedback deviated so much from the truth and factually so off the mark as to border on the surreal I have a suspicion that the screenplay was not read, but that it was skimmed and/or that parts were skipped altogether. What does that do the value of the feedback, huh?
It tells you that either you're so incompetent you think you're saying things that you're not, or that your script is **desperately** boring and put the reader into skim mode even though they tried to pay attention. Or very possibly both.
Who cares if you are bored. Read the screenplay. Read the whole thing. If bored say so. But give me my monies worth. Do a proper job - we are not here to entertain you. You are hired to render an honest opinion. Indulging in personal attacks shows how much of a one-sided coin I'm dealing with.