And if you don't, then how do I get people to be more interested in giving my story that "second glance"?

It would just be nice to get some feedback to see if my stuff sucks or not.

Sorry if this is a bit annoying.

Step Two: State on your profile that you return review. Sometimes on your specific stories.

Step Three: Post a lot in public forums. When you talk to others a lot, they generally get interested in how good a writer you are and check out your stuff.

I didn't really think too much about how to get more reviews, but the above poster seems to have the idea of it. Reviewing and posting on the forums aren't that hard. I don't get the concept of return reviews (not that much of an fiction-addict, honestly), but all three ideas seem like good ways to attract attention to your stories.

For more assured results, there are, for one,

Pay it Forward - http://www.fictionpress.com/community/Pay_it_Forward/709/

(Tip: focus on reviewing the latest added people. It's more likely they are active now)

There's also a more complicated way to getting reviews, The Review Game , but it assures a certain standard in the reviews

http://www.fictionpress.com/forum/The_Review_Game/1867/

(Tip: Read the rules carefully)

I have also heard of some groups outside FP... Youngwriters , I think. I don't know the address though, or what they do, but I think they also deal with giving and getting reviews.

But all of these basically say: review and you will get in return :)

EDIT:

@Ali

Cute avatar btw :P

I'm in a group for people on fictionpress, which is bacically all about giving each other reviews^_^ It's http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reviewers-found/

They basically give you a group and you all are responsible for reviewing the people in you group. There's like three people to a group.

Doesn't this detract from the value of a review? People reviewing because they are somewhat obliged, rather than because they like the story, no matter how good the reviewer is at giving critique or whatever, doesn't seem as genuine.

Yes, it doesn't seem as genuine, does it? But, if your looking for guaranteed reviews, they arent going to be as genuine. At least not with the group thing.

I think these "genuine" reviews are kind of overrated. FP people cant do them, thats for sure- Almost every story is underrated :/ What does it matter if concrit is coming from someone who accidentally found you or someone who found you from a group? Concrit is concrit. It's delicious either way.

Edit: Also, people can actually like the stories even if they didnt find them on their own. Happens all the time over at the RG and I am sure it does for reviewers fund too.

^_^ Well put.

That's not true at all. Genuine reviews are rated accordingly because they aren't expected, therefore such a review always tends to have a greater effect on the writer. Writers and readers choosing to engage in works with no previous expectations or pressures have the freedom to enjoy works without external pressure. This freedom then channels back into the writer/reader's autonomy and efficacy. So an unobligated review pattern goes:

Reviewer: I read the story, I liked/disliked it. I will review to tell them what I think.

Writer: I received a review.

The relationship is simple and genuine with no strings attached. By creating a situation where people are reviewing your work because they will receive a review back, or you are reviewing theirs with the expectation of receiving a review, failure to reach expectations will only cause disappointment and lament. For example:

Reviewer: This story was given to me. I give this person critique because that is what they are looking for. I expect to get a review in return.

Writer: I have received a review, it is good, it contains critique. I expected this review. It's nothing special.

There's just not as much joy in that. Sure you get feedback, and sure the reviewer might like the work, but as it was prescribed to them (ie they know that by reviewing this story, they get one back) and they have ulterior motives to reviewing. It cheapens the whole idea. And then there's the problem of not meeting expectations.

People misunderstand and think that the point of a review is to give concrit. It's not. Concrit is just an aspect of the review. Reviews are suppose to provide writer's with an audience hence to humble and encourage them. When the audience is fixed, that emotional service that reviews provide is lost. That's probably why people who participate in review circles tend to focus on the concrit aspect of the review - it's a cognitive strategy to minimise the emotional loss. The stance is hard to refute on the basis that writers who don't want concrit are seen as not 'true' writers wishing to improve themselves. So anyone arguing this point, despite their own policies regarding concrit is immediately discounted as a some sort of adolescent fool. No body mentions that turning reviews into a concrit fest is equally as demeaning to writing - and this is even without 'obliged' concrit.

And sure, obliged concrit may still be concrit, and may still be tasty, but it's just like McDonalds - it does the job, but it's meaningless.

I don't understand why writers are adopting this mechanicalized, automated review factory, means-to-an-end sort of stance to getting reviews. It saps the colour out of writing (reviews and stories alike).

What you're saying is all fine and dandy. But you're not getting it. People hardly get any reviews from this site just by posting a story! If people want to join these groups to get a reaction, concrit, or see what their feelings are concerning their story, they cannot be blamed for doing so! There is nothing cheap about it. People are genuine in their reviews. I don't know how it goes on at the Reviewers Fund, but over at the Review Game you don't review back the person that reviewed you. You review someone else. And there is no obligation or set person to review. The person up for reviewing changes daily in most threads, so you can just wait until you find something that sounds interesting if you're picky.

I don't really see where your problem lies.

Truth is: FP alone gives no reviews because the members hardly review. These groups enables people to be reached and be given opinions. There is only positive things about that.

Calling concrit meaningless is also quite the statement. I couldn't disagree more. If you can settle with the regular "OMGZ this is cool, please update" type of review, then that is fine. And it is also fine if others don't.

Edit: I just wanna specify I am pro-not forced reviewing and all, but you're living in a fairy tale if you think they're everywhere.

((I love your avatar FI!!!))

I'm part of like two groups that are great for getting you reviews; the only thing about the groups that I dislike (and this is just me because I'm chicken and if I have an opinion about the plot of a story or subject that is negative, I don't comment about it, I onlu commment when it's positive about the plot, because that is really up to the author) is when I have to review for a story that I REALLY don't enjoy, like the plot just seems stupid to me, so I have to resort to nitpicking to get the review done in order to avoid a flare, I guess 0_0 Don't want to piss anybody off. But then nitpicking pisses people off just as much, I think so It's kinda deadendish for me

^-^

Nitpicky reviews happens even when they are not forced. Sometimes I stumble upon stories that are just so much in need of concrit, I have to give it to them. Its those "genuine" reviews the burned one talked of.

Also, nitpicking is better, because then you can't be accused of "flaming", as some people like to yell at you sometimes when you give negative comments. Nitpick to save the drama, I say!

((I love it too! I can only imagine how yummy the revolver is haha!))

Tomato, potato. I just think the whole emphasis on receiving reviews is distorting what reviewing is about. I am not blaming anyone for joining these groups, I am just highlighting some of the drawbacks in doing so. I just had a look at the Review Game... sure, there's nothing wrong in such a community, it almost looks fun. People's participation is voluntary. My original point still stands, and Roman gave a good example of what I think is wrong about obliged reviews - it's like reviewing friends - it's hard to point out that their story sucks because you're invested in the relationship. The words "have to review a story that I REALLY don't enjoy" seems to sum it up - people are giving reviews because they feel like they have to. What does such a review mean? We need to look at the bigger picture. Genuine reviews, good or bad, are at least freely given.

In no way am I saying that concrit is meaningless. It is, however, grossly overemphasized.

But I can see that the argument lies within difference between ideals, not technicalities, so I know when to agree to disagree.

But even bad stories deserve reviews, if the author is willing to improve. :p Just wanted to add that.

I love con-crit ^-^

I agree with Bread.

And if the person is obliged to review whether they like the story or not...(assuming they don't) they have to fill out some kind of expectations depending on the "review requirement" to make it a "valid" review. There's really no way to say what is valid and what isn't. Sometimes there's really nothing a reader can say about a piece they just read besides "Wow, amazing work" or the opposite...sure it's not helpful but it's still a review nonetheless. I guess the requirements are there so the reviewer doesn't just act like they read the story to get a review out of it, but sometimes you just have to trust it.

And if you don't like the story and it's an obliged review...the reader still has to spend more time with it trying to pick out the likes and dislikes...it's very mechanical and takes the fun out of reviewing...I think the system in this is flawed...because if a review doesn't fit the requirements then that reviewer apparently has to review another one of that writers work...it's forcing it upon them.

all of this is my opinion.

Eh, I'm hearing a lot of 'what reviews are about', etc. But there's really no way to figure out what they're about. Reviews are different for different people; some use them to gain criticism and reinforce their stories, some use it to gain praise and reinforce their egos, some use it for a mixture of the two.

As far as I've seen, review-whoring CAN decrease the extent of these desired effects, but it still makes progress. Furthermore, someone can still whore for reviews and receive genuine ones at the same time; there's just a mixture.

You've just got to stick with what works for you.

^-^ Ha! Review whoring

I think that reviews are reviews, but that the reason this whole genuine thing is going around is because people want to think that people are reading and reviewing their stories because they like them. ^_^ I know I like to think that, as opposed to "Ya, my group is making me do this, so the whole time I was reading your story I was thinking 'this sucks. this sucks. this sucks' so I didn't even really give your story a chance"

*pouts* That's not a fun thing--from either end. But! We apreciate the concrit anyways :D

I don't really get how commenting on several areas in any way brings down a review. Sure, you might be totally smitten by the plot, but the author still have characters in the story, and obviously needs to know if those work or not. What does it hurt to comment on that? What makes it less genuine? Most that do go for the Review Game are interested in concrit, so they dont want the "Amazing work!" comment as a standalone. It doesn't help them become better authors. It's better if the person in question pinpoints what was so great.

The way I see it, the reviews given contain thoughts on the piece, then they back up it up with a reasons. Our opinions originate from somewhere. And I don't think it's a waste to explain it. Thought: fantastic! Reason: dialog was catchy etc. What's wrong with that? If one is going to "trade" reviews, why not make them worth something to the author? I see Fp as a learning site for aspiring authors. Having a "fantastic work!" or "This made me fall asleep" isn't really going to help in the long run.

because if a review doesn't fit the requirements then that reviewer apparently has to review another one of that writers work

Actually, if a review does not meet the requirements, the player is not counted as a player, end of story. Someone else will pick up where that person "failed". I personally don't really get what the problem is. The categories for requirement are easy. Write two sentences about the dialog. Pretty much all stories have dialog. Just form an opinion about it. And plot; most stories have it too. Spelling and grammar: of course! Characters are also in a story. It's all very basic elements of the story that are all easy to pick up and examine. You can even talk about enjoyment too, or take your own categories and talk about.

it's forcing it upon them

I remind you that it IS voluntary and thus it is not forced.

Also I just wish to say that Royal seems to be referring to the Review Game's review requirements and not the Reviewer's Fund or YoungWriters.

((Eh, do you type like super fast? That reply was like lightning! Ha, awesome ^-^And you wrote SO MUCH too :D))

I like the freebie thing in the reviewing game forum ^-^ I give away reviews a lot, and It's fun to get free ones too.

--- OFF TOPIC POST ---

Actually, since that post was a response to Lassies (Royal, I mean. I forget you guys dont know the nick ^^;) post I've had some time writing it. :P

Glad to hear you enjoy the Freebie! :3

GAH! And here I was imagining you clicking away at your keyboard with LIGHT SPEED! It was a fun image! XD

I love your little smiley guy :3 :3 :3 :3 Ha, awsome *crackles madly*

Are you a moderator for the review game or something?

maybe that was too random and now I'll be getting into trouble. . .

*hopes not*

--- OFF TOPIC POST ---

I created the Review Game forum, actually. Imalefty, my other mod, helped me with it (and still helps me with it). This is why I am so obviously biased.

And aww, I didn't mean to destroy the image of my super-fingers! Carry on imagining that. :D

Edit: Wow you're right we ARE getting off topic. Sorry. Iam too used to it -.-'' Please delete if it is in any way a disturbance!

OK! *trys to conjure up fan-freakin-tastic image*

OH NO-- IT'S GONE!!! *bottom lip wobbles dangerously*

^-^ The freebie makes me smile, all the crazy guessing that goes on it there, and the awesome review give aways! when I just feel like rreading but don't want to freaking search for stories that might rock my world, I just --post!--

Have you ever see Gravitation? I FREAKIN LOVE THAT SHOW!!! (ya, I'm obsessed's more like it XI)

You can go off-topic if you want. This forum has never had particularly strict rules.

Never saw Gravitation (romance anime isn't really my thing). I much prefer the bizarre junk :p

And Ima stop spamming now because I think this thread can be useful to people, so bye bye! :3

YAY!!! Off topic it is then! Well, that's what I'll mostly be posting I think ^-^

*shuffles feet sadly* Okay, ^_^ TTYL, I'll go spam somewhere else then o_o

...review whoring! That's so appropriate. I think the point being made is not what a review contains - both obliged and non obliged reveiws have the potential to contain the same elements, the only difference then is that there's no motive behind an unobliged review. It's the difference between someone doing nice things for you because they want to, vs someone doing something nice because they think they should.

As for Gravitation, man love aside, yes, that show was good for it's time. Shuichi was a good lead and watching him progress into stardom was interesting. I think my favourite character would have been Ryuichi - he and kumagoro were so much fun! More recent music anime just haven't been as good.

I think the point being made is not what a review contains - both obliged and non obliged reveiws have the potential to contain the same elements, the only difference then is that there's no motive behind an unobliged review.

Why is a motive necessary?

sorry, by motive I mean a ulterior motive rather than no motivation to review.

I figured.

What I mean is, why is an ulterior motive necessary? Why does someone have to give an author a review because they found it by their self / were attracted to it / whatever? Isn't the content what matters, what helps to improve a story or give a writer necessary encouragement to continue on? What makes the thoughts behind the words remotely relevant if they don't affect the actual body of the reviews?

What I mean is, why is an ulterior motive necessary? Why does someone have to give an author a review because they found it by their self / were attracted to it / whatever?

Clarification: An ulterior motive is usually only present in situations where people know/suspect that there is a high chance of getting a return review if they review something. For example, Nipples00 may say "I have a return review policy - review me and I'll go check your stuff out" on his profile. Now, if you happen to stumble onto his site, read his stories and give a review without a care for the review policy, then there is no ulterior motive in your review. If you are motivated by his review policy to review him, then an ulterior motive to review is exists.

Isn't the content what matters, what helps to improve a story or give a writer necessary encouragement to continue on?

That is the crux of the argument I think. I believe that though the result is what people place most emphasis on, a result can be more or less meaningful depending on the process. To illustrate this, I will use the example of birthday cards. For birthdays, you can (a) either buy a card, or (b) make a card (or (c) impregnate and enslave aliens to make cards for you). The result is the same - a card. Which one is objectively better? Likely the manufactured one. Which one is more meaningful? Likely the hand made one. It's the whole 'spirit' of the thing. Some people might not care, and that's ok too.

What makes the thoughts behind the words remotely relevant if they don't affect the actual body of the reviews?

Call me naive and romantic, but I also believe that thoughts/motives behind words are relevant to reviews. After all, words are just an extension of our thoughts. People who start reviewing communities do so with the intent of helping newbies get advice - that is noble. But despite all this talk of concrit and getting advice from reviews, I am sure there are people out there who participate in these review games just to get reviews for the sake of getting reviews. Wanting reviews is ok - everyone does. But letting this vanity dictate one's behaviour is not ok.

But perhaps I'm making my argument too strongly. I am arguing against the idea of acting with the main intent of getting reviewed because I don't believe this should become the dominant ideology propagated on this site. I am not personally against writers who have return review policies, neither am I against forums geared to reviews. I think we do need to be careful not to place too much emphasis on reviewing, also we need to remember that con crit is not the heart of a review, merely a limb.

It's always been hard to get reviewed on this site. I remember when fanfiction and fictionpress split, my sister and I went our separate ways and she stayed on fanfiction whilst I moved to fictionpress. It always bothered me to see even the most horrible fanfiction stories getting more reviews than anything on fictionpress. But that's the way it is here - getting reviews has never been easy. The game is changing now with the introduction of forums and communities, but challenging adversity and battling through hard times when you might not get the feedback you want, or any feedback at all, is what makes writing worthwhile. Journey into the whole art and profession of writing is riddled with uncertainties, disappointments and joy. If we can't be genuine in our actions, if our motives reflect anything less than a selfless, inquisitive interest in the work of our colleagues (and an almost manic-obsession with our own), it's just not as worth it.

...I feel like I've just written an essay. Sigh. If only psychological reports came as easily to me, I wouldn't be procrastinating so!

To illustrate this, I will use the example of birthday cards. For birthdays, you can (a) either buy a card, or (b) make a card (or (c) impregnate and enslave aliens to make cards for you). The result is the same - a card. Which one is objectively better? Likely the manufactured one. Which one is more meaningful? Likely the hand made one.

Yes, but we're not talking about cards. Cards are made to give someone a heartfelt message - a congratulation, condolence, etc. Reviews are simply to give praise, constructive criticism (and occasionally flames). While choosing a handmade card is better in that situation, in the case of reviews, the purpose of a review is different.

If three people each give me a review and they all say the exact same thing except that...

a) the first writes a long, heartfelt review on their own

b) the second copies off of the first person and puts that there

c) and the third and final reader enslaves aliens to do it (ending up with the same set of tips, criticisms and praise, perhaps in a slightly different form but otherwise identical)

...which is objectively better? The second reviewer is obviously a copycat, and the third didn't put in an ounce of effort or creativity - but they all said the exact same things. None is better than the rest because the message is the same: that paragraph two needs some rephrasing, that 'definitely' was spelled incorrectly in the final sentence, that the overall pace is too fast, etc.

I am arguing against the idea of acting with the main intent of getting reviewed because I don't believe this should become the dominant ideology propagated on this site.

Why? Is this behavior detrimental or harmful in any way to the person who thinks in such a manner (or to those around them)?

I think we do need to be careful not to place too much emphasis on reviewing, also we need to remember that con crit is not the heart of a review, merely a limb.

I don't really believe that at all. xD

The game is changing now with the introduction of forums and communities, but challenging adversity and battling through hard times when you might not get the feedback you want, or any feedback at all, is what makes writing worthwhile.

Don't we each decide what makes writing worthwhile on our own?

If we can't be genuine in our actions, if our motives reflect anything less than a selfless, inquisitive interest in the work of our colleagues (and an almost manic-obsession with our own), it's just not as worth it.

I don't believe this at all either.

People who whore for reviews are rarely 'ingenuine' about what they want. As a matter of fact, they frequently make it astonishingly clear; I've never heard someone obsessed with such things beat around the bush. Of course, I could be wrong, and there could be a cult of writers on Fictionpress who secretly desire reviews but never say anything about it and are deliberately deceptive whenever confronted with the subject, but I doubt it.

What's wrong with an interest in the work of others and the work of ourselves?

Who calls the shots on what's worth it and what isn't?

Intense. Again, it comes down to beliefs, and unless these beliefs lead to the harm of others or the irreversible deterioration of the social fabric, I can live with other people holding them. So, agree to disagree, ne?

Sure. :D

I understand.

I don't return reviews. Mainly that's cause I've got no stories up for anyone to review. =D

But its also sort of the whole concept. I don't want so seem so . . . shallow. "Hi its insertgenericpennamehere, and you reviewed my story Blargablargablee so thank you very much! I really like this story! By the way, pls review my other stories Blargablargablee: an Epic Sequal!" ect. I used to get a few of those, and they drove me bonkers. I wouldn't write anything like that, I know, and this is an incredibly dumb bias, but I've got a mental block up against it nonetheless.

I review on the basis of need. If I see something in the story that needs to be fixed, or I really like, I'll review it. If I'm obliged to review, I'll end up sitting at the computer searching for something that's obviously wrong or correct. Sometimes I find things that I think will actually help. Mostly I just end up being nitpick about grammar or other little things. It feels a little fake.

But I do like the idea of the review game. Everyone needs a community of writers to share there stuff with - that's why FP has forums. And its a draw for newbies who need help.

"Hi its insertgenericpennamehere, and you reviewed my story Blargablargablee so thank you very much! I really like this story! By the way, pls review my other stories Blargablargablee: an Epic Sequal!" ect.

Oh, dear God, I absolutely hate those. xDDD

Now I really want to write something called 'blargablargablee: an Epic Sequal' XD

1. Forums are not to be used to post stories.
2. All discussions, language and content, must be suitable for teens.
3. The owner/moderator(s) of this forum is solely responsible for content posted within this area.
4. All forum abuse must be reported to the moderator(s).

1. Forum admin/moderator
2. Fanatic (on site for more than 2 years)
3. Fan (on site for more than a year)
4. Regular (on site for more than 6 months)
5. Camper (on site for more than a month)
6. Apprentice (on site for more than a week)
7. Newbie (on site for less than a week)