What the hell I was pinged here.
What the hell happened here.
What the fuck is wrong with you all
Try not to look at me like some model reviewer. I am not. I am far from perfect and I don’t think I wish to be perfect because that’s a wholly unachievable standard and all it’ll do is cause too much stress for too little reward.
I thought NTSE was the place where you shouldn’t care about emotions. Just hand in the checklist, hand in the criticisms, get them fixed, Bob’s your creepy uncle who gives you fucking spongebob socks every year for Christmas.
Teachers don’t care about your “emotions” when they grade an essay of yours. They take it, they grade it for what it’s worth, they hand it back. They may say “good job” here or “you suck” there but it always tries to stay as objective as possible.
So why the hell is the NTSE trying to be any different. This system here has worked for centuries. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was some Ancient Greek kid who was bummed out because his teacher gave him a poor grade on his essay he spent a week working on.
And that’s the thing. Everyone wants to think their idea is perfect.
*inhale*
Cut. Your. Ego.
You are not perfect. Your ideas are not perfect. I can’t make them perfect.
But the idea that your idea is this immutable holy object and any modification to it is ABSOLUTELY HERETICAL is a silly idea.
Fuck, get over it. Rarely will your idea ever be the best.
I suggest every submitter stop trying to defend their idea like “it can never be changed because it’s perfect right?” Your article may very well potentially have flaws. In fact, for a lot of your your flaws are predictable.
Excuse me for this callout post — it only serves as an example for the trends in flaws.
- Ame tends to try and write too much in each subsection. Instead of making lists she embeds them into paragraphs.
- Zack tends to write the bare minimum.
- Arieg doesn’t have a sense for the balance of power in an abstract system, trying to apply too much realism.
- Frost tends to fill his articles with references to literally everything, making it take forever to tab through each link.
- Ethereal tends to be on the other end of the spectrum. He submits a Corp article and has zero products with articles, personally leaving me kind of confused.
The problem doesn’t come in these error trends. The problem comes in trying to say “No, I don’t have these problems!”
It’s like trying to deny that the constant of gravitational acceleration at the earth’s surface is 9.81 meters per second squared. You have the problems. You constantly have them.
I, however, do not suggest every reviewer soften up too. The objective remains the same: Help the person submitting. It’s our job to crunch the rules and apply them to the article.
Your job as a reviewer isn’t a subjective job. Objectively, it’s to hand a person the checklist and get on with life.
WHY ARE YOU NOT DOING THAT.
Hand a person a checklist, detailing everything. Get on with life. Go play Doki Doki Literature Club or something. If they argue, fine. Point out why you made the choices and let them have their justification. Don’t bend for them because of their emotions, bend for them because of their logic.
Meta, out.