mirror of
https://github.com/wassname/scrape_r_rational.git
synced 2026-09-09 11:33:49 +08:00
32 lines
2.5 KiB
Markdown
32 lines
2.5 KiB
Markdown
## Further Updates – Sufficiently Analyzed Magic [RT][OC]
|
||
|
||
* Author: u/jldew *
|
||
* URL: https://sufficientlyanalyzedmagic.wordpress.com/2018/02/11/further-updates/
|
||
* Score: 13
|
||
|
||
* Created: 2018-02-11T15:11:24
|
||
|
||
### Post:
|
||
|
||
[Link to content](https://sufficientlyanalyzedmagic.wordpress.com/2018/02/11/further-updates/)
|
||
|
||
### Comments:
|
||
|
||
> **u/space_fountain** [+2] (10 hours later)
|
||
>
|
||
> I didn't really read anything of it, but sorry to hear you had trouble. I keep trying to write and failing so I can definitely sympathize. Good luck on your rewrite and keep at it if it's something you enjoy
|
||
|
||
> **u/Afforess** [+1] *Hermione Did Nothing Wrong* (a day later)
|
||
>
|
||
> It sucks that you feel the need to pull all the old content down. I'd prefer edits that were inline and did not break-the-world. (I thought we all learned pause the world gc's were bad!)
|
||
>
|
||
> Meta commentary: I am always a bit confused the writing community doesn't have good standards or ideas on how to handle rewriting content. Plenty of authors get in binds where sequels have to deal with mistakes and continuity errors - mistakes accumulate like radioactive waste in longer sequels. This does not need to be so! Mistakes could easily be dealt with if the original works were revised and re-released. Yet this is rarely, if ever done, and when the rare author _does_ issue a re-release, it's a low-status signal of a _bad_ author. Shouldn't the opposite be true - re-releasing is a sign of high conscientiousness and quality? Shouldn't there be acceptable, standard ways to rewrite a story? (I'm not talking about Editions here, those are _de facto_ methods of updating grammar/spelling/syntax and not semantic content).
|
||
|
||
>> **u/jldew** [+2] (a day later)
|
||
>>
|
||
>> My issue is that it's not continuity errors whilst writing the sequel, it's continuity errors in the first story. Pacing issues aside, which I was trying to avoid, I'd really like to nail down a cohesive timeline both pre and during story.
|
||
>> Like I said in the note. There's issues with the plot that I thought I had figured out, and then it sort of went off the rails. Now I feel that my own story has grown out of it's original plot, and I frankly don't know how to fix that without rewriting several parts that I've posted and that I'm currently working on. And I don't want to totally rewrite current entries and then be like oh yeah. Sorry. Changed that. To me that is just bad form. I really want to avoid something like Pact where the beginning and ending where solid while the middle (ie Vancouver and etc) were meandering.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|