= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vaniver comments on A My Little Pony fanfic allegedly but not mainly about immortality - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (45)
Agreed. I suspect that you probably can't explain the story you want to the audience you have. Being more explicit about it might help, but... eh.
This depends on what metric you use to measure and what purpose you want to direct those intelligences towards. In general, the latter difference is larger.
From my reading of their response, if you drop the first two endings and make it explicitly a one-shot, it'll pass muster on word count. It's short, but that's because it's written with beautifully economic prose. (The "very flat" description just seems odd to me- that's the point! I don't know if you just need to find a sympathetic pre-reader or explaining the reason behind it will be sufficient.)
Yes, but the first two endings lead up to the third ending. Starting with the sad ending makes the happy ending happier. I really don't like making stories worse for EqD. (They're also bad about first-person narrative - the pre-readers sometimes complain about first-person narrative that isn't grammatically correct.)
The pre-reader's interpretation of the word limit rule was arbitrary - the rule just says "2500 words", nothing about alternate endings. It was silly for him to interpret the lower limit on words so that removing words makes the story appear to have more words.