Elizabeth Emerald

FanStory wrote to Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations! Third place finish in the Reviewing Contest!

Elizabeth Emerald:

CHOKE of the day: (I made this up, as you probably surmised)

Fang Fang did Swalwell

FanStory wrote to Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations! Third Place Finish in the Reviewing Contest!

FanStory wrote to Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations! Second Place Finish In The Reviewing Contest!

FanStory wrote to Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations on your second place finish in the Reviewing Contest!

Elizabeth Emerald: I write to commend KAHPOT for graciously accepting my 4-star rating, amending the piece per my suggestions, and nominating me to boot!

FanStory wrote to Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations! Honorable Mention Finish in the Reviewing Contest!

Elizabeth Emerald: Congratulations to Dolly's Poems for her upgrade to #1 reviewer. Upon her achieving such lofty status, the Grim Reaper icon was bequeathed her. I propose that this fearsome figure--who wields a scythe suitable for star-smashing--be swapped out for a friendly one. Perhaps a fairy princess who sprinkles magic stardust with a cheerful smile--apropos of Dolly, who always strews such wonderful words of encouragement along with a generous distribution of sparklers.

Elizabeth Emerald: Given that reviewer nominations generally vanish down the rabbit hole, I wish to commend Sarkems for an astute critique. There was a logical flaw in my story, which I'd been hesitant to post because something had seemed "off," yet I couldn't pin it down. SARKEMS did. I amended the piece forthwith.

Elizabeth Emerald: I wish to publicly laud Dina Bruun for a six-star review. Meaning six-stars to her for her four-stars to me. Dina wrote a painstaking critique of my script; she warmly expressed the many things she liked, and made several detailed suggestions for improvement. Her advice was spot on; I wasted no time implementing her apt recommendations, being eager to offer my best to the rest. As regards her extensive effort in my behalf Dina went above and beyond; as regards her giving a balanced review Dina did exactly as we are supposed to do. Kudos to her. As Freudians (probably don't really) say--sometimes a cigar is just a cigar; I say--sometimes "good" means good.

...On the flip side...sometimes "good" means: THIS SUCKS! I recently got a four-star review for a parody piece that taken on face value was not worthy of even a one. The reader gave up in disgust three lines into my monstrosity in which (per the footnote) I spew utter nonsense in a jumble of atrocious grammar and usage.

Elizabeth Emerald: I am frustrated at being MUTEd after having given a three-star review, shortly after which I set out in search of other pieces by the author that would merit high-fives and found myself locked out. A shame, surely I would have found worthy works amidst her portfolio--she'd have more than made up her stars.

Elizabeth Emerald: To be sung to Where Have All the Flowers Gone?

Where have all the sixes gone?
Long time since I got one
Where have all the sixes gone?
Lord hear my plea

Where have all the sixes gone?
Gone to others, every one
When will they ever learn!
Save some for me!

Where have all the sixes gone?
Good news: they changed the rule!
They're sure to come my way
Since there's no cap

Where have all the sixes gone?
Alas, I still have none
When will I ever learn
My work's mere pap

Elizabeth Emerald: Sung to My Sharona, The Knack 1979

When ya gonna get to me, my Corona?
Is it just a matter of time Corona?

You're never gonna stop, such a dirty brand
Gotta stay away from the touch of an un-washed hand

M-M-M-My Corona!

Oooh, I'm afraid: Next it's me
Wish it were a game in my mind Corona
Can it be: Destiny?
You're falling down upon us from the sky, Corona

M-M-M-My Corona!

Oooh, it's going up, going up
How my fever burns
We're all throwing up, throwing up
Taking toilet turns

M-M-M-My Corona!

Elizabeth Emerald: Rename proposal: Fan-Story Land to Five-Starry Land.

Alas, after a six-week struggle, I too have succumbed to High-Five Fever.

Check out the ranked writers list. Everyone gets an "A" plus-or-minus. When I was in grammar school, "A" stood for "average." Seems that's the case here as well.

Elizabeth Emerald: Not that it's up for your vote
Still, a verse worthy of note
Been brewing two days
On the Corona craze
Alas, I must pay to promote

Elizabeth Emerald: Tell me, somebody: Have I gone ghost?
No one has looked at my post
My mood: downward spiral
It should surely go viral
This terse verse of which I can boast

Elizabeth Emerald: This bitch of a critter Corona
Has turned each of us into a loner
It's OK to a point
Watch the tube, toke a joint
But who's there to do with my boner?

Elizabeth Emerald: Rolling randily 'round on the rug
Just last week, now not even a hug
God forbid, stick it in her
Cries the erstwhile sinner:
Corona's a bitch of a bug

Elizabeth Emerald: One of my very first reviews was 4-stars. I was pleased by the feedback; the reviewer said what he liked about the piece and I took GOOD at face value. Shortly thereafter I got another 4-star review where the reviewer made clear his GOOD was intended as a demerit.

And so began my introduction to our ratings system, where GOOD is the new BAD. I expounded upon this in my profile; I later released my thoughts under the title: Next: Exceptionally Exceptional? (subtitle: Must we be haunted by spectral stars?)


I'm bringing this up again now because I just got ALL-CAPS BLASTED by a poet for "only" 4-stars, which in our crazy world is perceived as "taking away" one due her.

Funny, have you noticed that even "revenge reviews" (and I've had a couple) are 3-stars--as if to go lower would be superfluous! Cheers. LIZ

Elizabeth Emerald: In Fanstory Land, Five is the New Three, and Good is the new Bad.

I'm less than a week old in this strange world and have already submitted three pieces for which I have received a total of 15 reviews.

One of my reviews was Good. I was pleased: The reviewer specified a section he found "interesting and informative."

Yesterday---having had to spend 75 real dollars to promote my own work---I began to review others' submissions, not only to earn $ but also out of genuine interest.

Curious to see other reviews of a piece, I began to peruse them.
I was astounded to see that virtually all were Excellent or Exceptional. One author, in response to a Good review, requested that the reviewer replace the star that she "took away," which the author assumed was on account of the typos the reviewer helpfully pointed out. Apparently, it didn't occur to the author that the reviewer simply did not deem the work Excellent. (P.S. The reviewer gave the star "back.")

This perception of having one star taken rather than four stars given is reinforced by the graphics that depict shattered phantom stars---as if a vengeful reviewer had smashed them. Must we be haunted by spectral stars? I propose that we sweep away the ghostly shards and let the three or four stars shine.

I'm all for keeping it positive. Indeed, in all the pieces I reviewed, I managed to muster enthusiasm in my words, regardless of the Average rankings I saw fit to assign some.

The default position is, by definition, Average. For that reason, I would never presume that a piece is Below Average. If I consider it Good or Excellent I will say so---I am pleased to have done just that for several so far.

Cheers. (Regarding which Three is Good!)