HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
By Patrick Hurley July 24, 2007 As a writer's website, Useless Knowledge has unlimited potential. When I joined a year ago, I did so because I was impressed by an article written by Robert Paul Reyes. Since then, he and I have become literary friends and we respect each other immensely. I have the same relationships with Brooks Mick, Meri Ulrich, Thomas Keyes, Jack Lepiarz, Kaycee Nilson, Tracey Stevens, Fred Smith, Michael McCrae, Allen Robinski, Ken Hughes and many others. I respect them because they dare to write. Their focus is not on the Rebuttal section but on the Main Page. They want to express themselves and they take the time to put themselves and their views out there for the world to see. I find that admirable. Are we criticized for some of our efforts? Absolutely. There is no question that every article written has flaws both grammatically and in content. As writers we welcome constructive criticism that has its focus on our work. We want to be better in what we do. So, a suggestion is valuable to us in that process of improvement. Like gold refined by fire, our writing becomes more valuable as it is tested and honed by others. There is a significant difference between literary and personal criticism. This is not a concept akin to understanding nuclear physics. When we are attacked on a personal level it is baffling to us and mean spirited in its texture. Why would someone take the time to viciously point out their resentment of someone outside of the writing arena? You only have to travel a short distance to the Rebuttal Section in here to find the answer to that question... Using anonymous and cowardly handles to hide behind, these individuals compensate for their own lack of writing ability to lurk in the darkness and wait for each new article to pounce on. Unfortunately, they are not skilled enough to assess the writing so they go after the writer. They take advantage of the anonymous makeup of the Internet to sit at their keyboards and spew their venom delighting in their use of middle school mind sets and profane filled phraseology. They are on the level of the bully on the playground except worse since they hit and run in the darkness which not only protects them but fits them. Because of them they have abused the Rebuttal section to the point where it is no longer viable for any of us writers here. As much as we desire feedback, we need to have a forum where we can receive it in a classy way not in a publicly demeaning tantrum that typifies cretinism in its most elementary form. I left Useless Knowledge as did many of my contemporaries because we grew weary of babysitting the children and their tantrums. I keep coming back because I believe in UK and I want to see it become great again. It was my first writing forum and even though I now write for several other magazines, I have a special place in my heart for Matt and his creation. But, something more needs to be done here in order for that creation of his to grow and prosper... Useless Knowledge needs to expel the insects that proliferate there and start over. This can be a great website for writing. It can be a wonderful place for new writers to test their talents. But, it can only accomplish that by eliminating those who do not contribute to the Main Page. If they do not write articles on a consistent basis they should not be allowed in the Rebuttal section. If they want to criticize, they have our email addresses and we can choose to delete them depending on the level and content of their criticism I appeal to the Editors to make good writing in here the focus of this site and to spray the infestation that remains in order to preserve our credibility and classiness. In that way the roaches and rats that prowl the Rebuttal area will no longer have life to spread their toxic diseases on a site that deserves clean air and purity in literature. --------------- [The Editor Responds: We respect and appreciate Mr. Hurley's sentiments, and we certainly welcome him back to U-K after his long sabattical. What happens in the Rebuttal Section however, has absolutely no bearing on the content of the Main Page. The articles that appear on the Main Page are direct contributions from the U-K authors, and thus we would ask Mr. Hurley if his appeal "to make good writing in here the focus of this site" should not be directed at the writers themselves? Furthermore, we would also ask Mr. Hurley how he plans to determine who to "expel?" Who are the "roaches and rats", and who are the "writers", Mr. Hurley? This seems to be clearly a matter of subjective opinion, and the U-K Editors feel this treads dangerously close to censorship, and cronyism. Useless-Knowledge is not a "club", it is an open forum for writers to practice their art. Most of our writers simply avoid the Rebuttal Section and write exclusively for the Main Page. We would ask Pat Hurley to try this easy solution, first, before "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". Lastly, the Rebuttal Section is already being moderated by Jack Lepiarz and Michelle Malsbury, two longtime U-K columnists, and they have complete authority over what happens in there. Please direct any future Rebuttal Section suggestions--to them.] --------------- About the author: Patrick Hurley has won three Emmy awards for writing, hosting and producing television shows. He resides in Southern California. Email: coolhumor@sbcglobal.net Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
