home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   rec.arts.sf.composition      The writing and publishing of speculativ      144,800 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 142,998 of 144,800   
   mumble to Jacey Bedford   
   Re: Definition of 'published'   
   04 Jun 14 08:45:48   
   
   From: mumble@nomail.invalid   
      
   On 06/04/2014 04:12 AM, Jacey Bedford wrote:   
   > On 04/06/2014 08:54, Chris Dolley wrote:   
   >> How about going for a flexible approach - open the Milford doors on a   
   >> trial basis and see what happens? You may also want to initially limit   
   >> the numbers of people attending who don't have the traditional   
   >> qualifications. I think a guideline of 'indie authors who have earned at   
   >> least $3,000 in royalties' would be a reasonable starting point. Then   
   >> see what happens and adjust accordingly.   
   >   
   > It could be that we leave the basic bar in place, but add a rider to say   
   > non-traditionally published authors may apply on a case by case basis   
   > and have a sales figure as a secondary (but not published) bar. An indie   
   > author who has employed a professional independent editor, for instance,   
   > should probably take precedence over one with higher sales figures who   
   > has gone for a 100% do-it-yourself job.   
   >   
   > All your comments are hgelping tremendously and I'm now wondering if a   
   > points system (formal or informal) may be helpful.   
   >   
   > Points:   
   > Sales revenue (royalties) of over £2000 = 5 points   
   > Sales revenue (royalties) of over £5000 = 10 points   
   > Employing an independent professional editor = 5 points   
   >   
   > A minimum of 10 points would be needed to qualify.   
   > Does that make sense?   
   >   
   > And yes, it would make sense to (initially) limit the numbers of   
   > non-traditionally published authors to maybe 3/15 until we got a better   
   > idea of how it would work out.   
   >   
   > Jacey   
   >   
      
   This whole business of attempting to judge authors based on how much   
   money they've pulled in by writing seems very much off the mark.   
      
   Even the "bestselling author" description is not worth so much as it   
   might imply, because many factors like marketing enter into what has   
   been sold by a given publisher or group of publishers.   
      
   I'll do my best to shut up on this topic, I'm not likely to attend a   
   conference in the UK in any case unless they remove the security-nazis   
   from airports.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca