Young Writers Society

I'm only harsh when needed.

Though it might hurt, people can not take harsh critiques personally. Because in reality, if you want to get published you have to learn how to take harsh words and critics won't sweeten the load, if anything it'll be worst. So cherish the harsh reviews here because at least you're hearing them from friends and not people who really want to bring you down.

~Angel

Me? Harsh? Really?

Well, I guess I am. But that's because a) I only critique pieces where I can pick on something and compliment something and b) I'm a perfectionist. Plus I've read a lot more than I did when I first joined, so I have more judgment.

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Galerius yet. Maybe it's just because I haven't been a regular in a while, but he was nasty.

Personally, I think the best approach (what I try to do with varying amounts of success) is middle-of-the-road. Don't be useless, like "OMG this was so great! Write more!" and don't be like Brad, who pretty much said "This is garbage. Don't even try to save it." Find something good, something not-so-good, and try to be nice about it.

I only just came to YWS and I've done my best to be a good critic. I guess I'm not as good as I thought I was. In comparison to all the other great critics around here, I am a pile of mush. See? I just complimented critics. WHAT'S WRONG WITH ME?

Galerius is a beast. Very harsh.

Andy's (Squall) harsh and so is JFW. I haven't seen anyone on the list's critiques so I can't say if they're harsh or not.

I decided to try and compare my crits with some of the people on the lists and I kind of feel that every bodies critiques have they're own way of being great. I mean, yeah, some of them are harsh but the harsh critics are harsh toward posts that need a harsh attitiude. And even then, its respectively so. And the sweet, bubbley crits are sweet and bubbley cause they diserve to be.

So if you ask me, all of them are good, in there own way of course.