Coping With Poor Reviews

[Narcissistic_loser]

Why try too hard, just do what u want and what u enjoy writing.

 

[Sebas_Guzman]

Friend, you need to chill.
Then, understand that the best advice is to not engage with a reviewer. This kind of stuff rarely turns out well. If you think something is unfair, go through site operators.
In your case, yeah, nah. You ain't your best advocate.

Edit: Did you write your own tvtropes page?

 

[APieceOfRock]

However, I think you have misplaced blame. You are probably blaming me (and maybe God), when you should actually be blaming the doctors and the drugs. These drugs do cause painful and permanent side effects on the body. They add a few years of life (maybe), but the quality of life is far worse than had they just let the cancer kill them. There are antioxidants in many natural herbs and fruits, which help boost the immune system and normalize cancers. And the body, even without treatment, can fight cancer. Look up Killer T Cells.
https://www.health.harvard.edu/cancer/teaching-t-cells-to-fight-cancer More importantly, most of these treatments are painless and do not damage the body. So I'm sorry you blame me, but I did not kill your grandma. And I think herbal remedies actually would have helped her or at least allowed her to have a less painful

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But that only works with early stage cancer. Chemotherapy and invasive surgery and other stuff is required if you want to keep your life.
My grandpa had a pretty big cancerous tumor near his liver (I think. It's been dozens of years) and had to get it removed and undergo chemotherapy. It literally added 40+ years into his left before he died in 2019. Edit: not sure if it's 40 years. I don't wanna wake my parents up for this but just know that he lived for years more than he would've
If what you said is true then people should do both. Not either. Both.

 

[bulmabriefs144]

Friend, you need to chill.
Then, understand that the best advice is to not engage with a reviewer. This kind of stuff rarely turns out well. If you think something is unfair, go through site operators.
In your case, yeah, nah. You ain't your best advocate.

Edit: Did you write your own tvtropes page?

Does it show? Yeah, I kinda did. Then I think someone else copypasted my article to AllTheTropes.

If what you said is true then people should do both. Not either. Both.

What most of the herbal articles say is that the body is completely ravaged after chemo and/or radiation, and I believe it.

But you could do both. I just don't advise it. That's like drinking a probiotic and then following it with bleach.

Of the three main treatments for cancer (chemo, surgery, and radiation), I actually recommend surgery. My dad had testicular cancer, and got laprascopy. Never heard about the cancer again. Anyway, I don't wanna get into a big argument. I have a tendency to rant (you've noticed, I'll bet). Herbs/plants plus surgery? Sure. The other two seem to sabotage any good done to the body.

Overall, thanks for the input everyone. Mostly feeling better. I'm gonna go check Generic Battle Academia's fight scene for a feedback post.

 

[Jamminrabbit]

Wish I can upload to Amazon.

The curse of writing lewd.

You can, don't let that stop you

 

[Theirl]

How do you do it? How deal with people who critique your work, when you can't have a civil discussion because they've blocked PMs and chatting? Like, you can't explain why you put this and that in your book because they are unavailable. Me, I want to be liked, even if it doesn't seem that way, so it hurts when someone unconditionally hates my stuff. And not just hates the stuff that I also thought was bad, but doesn't even bother to understand me.

---

Actually, it's what is known as worldbuilding. I am describing how medicine developed in the 20th and 21st centuries from the perspective of someone in the 70th century where magic is real. In the 16th century, bloodletting was done. That's only four or five centuries of gap, right? Now think of 50 centuries and how different medicine might be.



Science always marches on, even fantasy science. The things you think are so sophisticated today are likely to be scoffed at tomorrow. And yes, I do tend to rant and go on tangents, but this section did have an important reason to be added. "How was Ambrosia healed?" I wanted to answer the question of how medicine works in this world. Being a fantasy world, it rejects what you see as "science" as backwards.



The first chemotherapy was developed following exposure to mustard gas. It has a 90% fail rate, because the body makes stem cells against it. I can show you my research if you like. But you either believe it or you don't.



If you trust your medicine as though it can solve all problems, what happens when your doctor misdiagnoses you? Or gives you a medicine at an overdose? Yes, people do sometimes take drugs because they would like them to work, not because they do work.

But you've missed an important point here. This is an explanation of how people 5000 YEARS in the future are doing medicine. In Discworld, they used to think the world was round, but now know it's a disc on the back of four elephants riding on a turtle. The point being that an author can set up any rules to how science or medicine evolved that they like, and the reader is supposed to suspend their disbelief, even if it's hilarious.

What you want to believe outside of reading my book is up to you, but you've failed at reading the story, I'm afraid.



Because of trust. People like you trust the science, and keep taking medicine even if it makes you cough and gives you warts. Side effects? Who cares?!? "Modern" medicine has continued far longer than it should. I would have thought people would stop taking dangerous drugs long ago, but even a cursory glance at how doctors said thalidomide was "non-toxic" in 1958 despite awful birth defects, yeah that tells me that's not the case. Look up PFOA in your spare time.



I am on the schizo spectrum, yes. But more importantly, I'm worldbuilding. Which I can tell you've never done.



She was trying to leave, and someone was literally killing people who tried to leave without paying, and she gets moved back into line. That was the joke.

Sigh...

---

Said critic has no public profile, so I cannot chat with them to explain my writing choices. They also don't appear to have written anything. So I have someone who I can't talk to, what hasn't contributed anything meaningful, who wants to put down the way I write. How do I cope with them? I guess I like to publicly mock them. Yes, it's petty. I know.

...So what does everyone do to cope with poor reviews?

well u need to first stop try to read your work again without bias and see if the critiscism is really valid, if it is u have 2 choices first try to improve or just ignore it because it too much work. the only person that u own anything is yourself and u need to think if the consequence of your action are worth it or not.

 

[LunaSoltaer]

Well, tbh, I've found alot of churches to be very welcoming as a trans person. Part of why I turned against the trans community, I realized they lied to me. They were pushing a narrative that just wasn't what I'd found at all. For the record, I'm played Green/Black and White/Black decks. They're a little fidgety, but I have managed to make what I call "cancellation decks" (bring back dead a number of ways, disenchant, and get rid of artifacts).

Bottom line, juxtaposition and the occasional contradiction is okay by me. But it does explain nicely my broken fanbase.

Yeah basically exactly what I'm talking about with the Magic colours. You ran Black with both of its enemy colours (W, G) and probably found some solace in it emotionally as well as fun revival and disenchant.

I've run the full gamut, but I think Red/Blue fit me best pre transition and now im more red white. maybe R/G/W for naya colours. I dont really play anymore since I can't really get behind WotC's more recent developments (freaking The One Ring card and 30th anniversary boosters, ugh!)

And Christianity has this thing to it. I've noticed that those who claim the title tend to be really good or really not. I suspect there's a correlation about how many actually practice the finer details of their faith, but I digress.

And yeah, i definitely hear you on the community front. My strategy so far has just been to find individuals I can connect with and talk to them, understanding that I will likely develop a set of contacts about as all over the place as I am.

 

[RepresentingEnvy]

Sometimes I just accept that the reviewer is somehow more dumb than I am. I had a reviewer spend much of the review talking about people who were shipping characters together in the comments.

 

[ItsmeXD]

Repeat after me :

"Stick and Stones may harm my body, but mean words wouldn't harm me at all."

 

[Arkus86]

I think what bothered me the most about it was that, having read only one chapter, they wrote on the book page (where everyone can see an unsightly 1 star review), not the chapter page where it only addresses the chapter they read. It's like the difference between a kid making finger painting inside a house and someone making graffiti on the outside. And this is a house you spent months building only for the graffiti expert to say "The builder sucks." The other thing that bothers me is that it isn't really even about my quality of writing (though I do wish I wrote it more concisely), it's about that they don't agree with my values, therefore it sucks. Yes, it is somewhat true, and the truth of it bothers me. I do sometimes have unpopular ideas, and I do tend to worry that I'm not being concise.

Be glad that they left a review that everyoe can see and judge for themselves, instead of just leaving a rating, and while they could have perhaps framed it better, they do raise valid points. Maybe not as valid for you, but it is certainly valid for other potential readers.
That said, if you need to explain your writing choices, it might mean you have already failed in making it clear within the story itself.

 

[doravg]

First time?
That is why you finish the book before publishing it. That way you can feel good about yourself during the whole process. Every time I didn't have patience, and published before it was complete, I was influenced by the views. So, finish that novel, and then give it to the readers!
You will be happier for it.

 

[AliceShiki]

@AliceShiki
Please tell them to stop talking about religion.

In that case, @AliceShiki He's here. ^

Why are you mentioning me? I now have to read a buttload of walls of texts to try finding rulebreaking posts? Why?

The report button is right there. Just use it and say "Religion" on your report and the mods will take care of it.

 

[Anon2024]

Well, I used to get upset at reviews before. In the end though, one will have to accept that people are different and most people online like to criticize things to make themselves feel better, that’s how it works.

Never take things online personally.
Remember the reviewer often doesn’t know you personally. There are many reasons they might hate your work including being triggered.

Approaching it from an objective and logical standpoint is often the best way.

Also, as someone who has had discussions with people online, it’s often not worth it to talk since I’ve determined the majority of people I get into arguments with lack insight, are often delusional and have very little sense of reality with no desire to even understand what I’m saying.

Thus, just do your own thing.

 

[Lire]

Who cares that a non-paying reader doesn't like your work?

It's all about the money, baby.

I'm glad when anybody says they like my thingy, but negativity from a freeloader does nothing to me. I just greedily devour anything I can from their "feedback" and then move on.

Write more. Build backlog. Increase Patreon advance chaps. Make slightly more money. Buy ice cream. Be happy.

Win.

 

[TheMonotonePuppet]

I do it like this, I do it like that, I did her with a wiffle ball bat.


Not one shred of my self-esteem is based on the opinions of others.


Let go.


This. This right here. This is your problem. You want to be liked. You don't want to be a good writer, you don't want to improve, you don't want fame or money or power. You wish to be liked. Why? Why is the opinion of others so important that you would twist yourself into a pretzel to appease the sensibilities of people you will never speak to again?


Oh. It seems that way.


It shouldn't. 1% of the population Is insane. Statistically speaking, 1% of the population should be locked up and treated for major mental illness. Another 4% show shadow symptoms are most likely at least neurotic. So if you know 19 sane people, you are the nutter. Regardless, there is always someone who just wants the world to burn.


Because they enjoy your suffering and torment. It is fun to hurt people. I used to be a bill collector. I was a professional asshole who got paid money to TORTURE PEOPLE over the phone until, out of sheer frustration, they paid me money just to get rid of me. Trust me, hurting people is fun.

It also erodes your soul until you have nothing left and you are hollow and dead inside, but still fun.

Okay... say it with me now...

FEED THE TROLL
YOU SHOULD NOT
Merged text that is responding to creator of thread.
Quite honestly, I think the critic was perfectly justified in flaming you. You are spreading/pushing medical misinformation that has and does kill or permanently harm people. Not to mention, people DIE of these illnesses and only get to spend more time with their family because of modern medicine, so seeing someone callously spreading something that kills can be both heart-breaking and mind-numbingly enraging.

 

[pynkbites]

Well, tbh, I've found alot of churches to be very welcoming as a trans person. Part of why I turned against the trans community, I realized they lied to me. They were pushing a narrative that just wasn't what I'd found at all.

Yeesh. You push dangerous pseudoscience AND you're a huge bigot? Here's a bit of advice from someone who's been online longer than you've been alive:

There are two ways to take criticism. The first is as a personal attack, as you did in this thread. You angrily insist you're in the right, you're being persecuted, so on and so forth. In the end, you wind up feeling angry, dissatisfied and entirely impotent.

The second way is to accept that criticism, internalize it, and use it as an opportunity for improvement. By analyzing what you did wrong and learning how to do better next time, you will grow and change, and become a better person.

If people are criticizing you for being homophobic or pushing harmful pseudoscience, then maybe you need to get off your high horse and LISTEN to them. You have a lot to learn from what they're saying. If you choose to ignore their warnings, I'm certain you will receive many more bad reviews in the same vein, and will have nobody but yourself to blame.

But hey, I'm just a stranger online. Take my advice, or don't. It's your choice.

 

[LunaSoltaer]

Yeesh. You push dangerous pseudoscience AND you're a huge bigot? Here's a bit of advice from someone who's been online longer than you've been alive:

There are two ways to take criticism. The first is as a personal attack, as you did in this thread. You angrily insist you're in the right, you're being persecuted, so on and so forth. In the end, you wind up feeling angry, dissatisfied and entirely impotent.

The second way is to accept that criticism, internalize it, and use it as an opportunity for improvement. By analyzing what you did wrong and learning how to do better next time, you will grow and change, and become a better person.

If people are criticizing you for being homophobic or pushing harmful pseudoscience, then maybe you need to get off your high horse and LISTEN to them. You have a lot to learn from what they're saying. If you choose to ignore their warnings, I'm certain you will receive many more bad reviews in the same vein, and will have nobody but yourself to blame.

But hey, I'm just a stranger online. Take my advice, or don't. It's your choice.

I see what looks like some genuine helpful advice in this, and I want to like it, I really do, but I can't.

I'm not going after your criticism of pseudoscience here, as that's really the only part of your flame that's reasonable. The rest of it? yeah, good job showcasing exactly WHY SHF has a no religion rule.

"I, a trans person, attended multiple churches while Out as a trans person, and did not find persecution, contrary to what the trans community said" is not bigotry. Don't water down this word. I am hammering this point very specifically because doing so presents a danger to Me when now I can't differentiate between "somebody someone dislikes" and "someone who means to harm me" because the former got normalised by posts like this.

The fact that you led with this tells me you care more about appearing morally superior than actually contributing, especially since attacking predisposes people AGAINST you and with your attempt at claiming elder status you should know that. Speaking of, that age quip further supports my suspicion. If you took out those two things, I'd probably have liked your post because of the actual advice in it.

Once again, I am NOT defending OP's medical beliefs.

And to conclude, your actual advice (that you can choose to not respond aggressively to a negative review) is really good, though the way you phrased it ignores that there's a middle ground between aggressive counterattack and wholehearted acceptance. This is the part I really want to like. You just shot yourself in the foot so I can't endorse this.

 

[Anon2024]

Is there no mod here?

 

[justabot]

Is there no mod here?

Maybe me. Maybe.

Thread has gone offtopic too much so I'll lock it.