 |
|
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) tanaise | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From comments in Hannah's journal, but probably more useful here: I think it's because I wonder at a couple of things that we all tend to take for granted (most recently examples from comments in Charlie's post as well as the post itself)--that women are less likely to submit to the big markets, that we sub in different patterns than men, that not as many are subbing places.
but ultimately, I know my data will be flawed since it draws upon a self-selected sample, and presumably an elite sample as well (LJ users). So mostly it's just that I'm curious. Okay. Totally non-scientific, but it's as good as you're going to get in these parts. Pass it around. (*Please* pass it around. A poll is only as good as its sources, and I will make no ground shaking discoveries based solely on my friends list, as I know what most of you will answer already.) Marvel at the answers. I'll do a summary or a follow up as necessary. Oh, and if you're looking at this poll and sad because you lack an LJ account and thus can't take my poll, you can always email me (livejournal address, please), and I'll add you in at the end, when I put all the numbers into excel tables and stuff. I can't edit the quiz, so I'll just put notes in here. For 'top-down' read--a ranking of pro-to-not based on whatever you see as the priorities, such as pay, prestige, etc. I just want to know if you're starting at the top of a list, whatever you see that top as, and working down to the bottom, as opposed to the other options listed. If you make a mistake/forget something/whatever, you can change your answers even after you've submitted the poll. I know the submission numbers are weird--round to the nearest. I was posting in a hurry before a meeting, and panicked when it told me I could only have 20 options, since math is HARD. If you'd like to clarify your submission numbers in comments, please do so. If you have a pro-submits to pro-sales ratio handy, that would also be loffly because I realize i didn't ask that in the poll. Poll #747888 Battle of the sexes
Open to: All, detailed results viewable to: AllI am: (for simplicity's sake, what you identify as.) I am a: (variation of SFWA rules) I submit my stories to: I use a _________ method of submitting stories. I have made at least ________ fiction submissions. (don't count poetry) I have been seriously submitting stories for _______ years. I have stopped sending stories to a pro market because I don't think I have a chance there. I submit to: (Pros only: http://www.sfwa.org/org/qualify.htm#Q5) I have sold stories to: (pro magazine sales only) Notable non-pro sales (You get 75 characters. make them count) Any questions I should have asked? (I'll do a follow up quiz if there are good ones.) Current Music: Keane - Broken Toy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Page 1 of 2
[1] [2]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I submit with a targeted top-down approach. That is, I submit to the market I think the best fit for the story, out of a limited selection of markets that pay pro rates (though may not qualify for SFWA pro because they don't publish often enough, e.g. Black Gate, or haven't been around long enough, e.g. Baen's Universe).
Then the next market I think might like it, and so on. If I run out of well-respected* markets, I trunk it. (If I'm not writing stories good enough to sell to those markets, then I don't want the stories in public.) I will take a chance and send stories I suspect are not editorially appropriate to some markets, because, to paraphrase JW Campbell, it's not my business to be rejecting stories for them.
F&SF pretty automatically gets first crack at everything (the few stories I write), because they are fast, pro-qualifying, pay well, and publish a broad range of things, so almost nothing is outright inappropriate for their editorial slant (as opposed to, say, a unicorn story for Analog).
*well-respected markets are all those that pay pro rates, or that at least have a well known reputation for not buying crap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like many others, I'm top-down/targeted, but I'll spice it up with a scattershot element! <g> That is, I start with F&SF and then Strange Horizons (for a confluence of reasons), then (or sometimes before) try the places where I think it stands a really good chance, and beyond that, I fling things at whatever's open. I've had enough instances of things selling where I didn't expect them to that I'm disinclined to decide a story isn't appropriate for a market; I try most things most places. (Within reason. Asimov's, for example, gets only the less high-fantastical of my stories, and I don't sub to Analog at all, being more or less purely a fantasy writer. Etc.)
I sub and sometimes sell to respected semi-pro markets, generally but not always after the pro ones -- oh, and I forgot to list my Talebones sale in my entry -- but I tend to stop when they hit the point of a flat fee instead of a per-word rate; I think Lone Star Stories might be my only exception to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
From: scalzi |
Date: June 15th, 2006 12:41 am (UTC) |
| (Link) |
|
I typically don't write short stories unless I've pre-sold them to an editor or publisher. Part of the reason for this is that I make better money writing other sorts of things (non-fiction articles and corporate writing, fiction and non-fiction books), and since writing is how I pay my mortgage, writing stories that I haven't already placed somewhere is low on my list of things to do (most of my unpaid writing time goes to my blog). This means I have an excellent track record in placing the stories I've written; on the other hand, it also means I don't write a lot of short stories (in fact, I've only written five SF short stories so far).
Outside of SF I've written one other short story, when I did a fundraiser off my personal site; folks would make a donation to me (which I then passed along to Reading is Fundamental) and then in return I sent them a short story, a poem and a humorous article via e-mail. The fundraiser made $750, which I suppose means that if I'd been paid for all three I would have gotten $250 each; for the story in question that would have worked out to about four-and-a-half cents a word.
If I did write a SF story just for fun and then later decide to sell it, I would not be likely to submit it to Asimov's, Analog or F&SF, not because I'd be worried about not being able to sell there, but because none of the three accept e-mail submissions, and printing things out is a hassle. My first stop would be Strange Horizons, and if it didn't sell there I'd probably simply put it up on my own site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
From: fairmer |
Date: June 15th, 2006 03:13 am (UTC) |
| (Link) |
|
Much like in real life, I don't know how to hold a grudge... So in spite of some flaky editorial behavior, I've continued submitting to some places that I probably shouldn't--just moved them further down the list. When the decision comes to trunk it or to face potential crap, I choose crap every time.
Though, to be fair, for my experience, extreme flakiness so far hasn't been duplicated in any one place. Also: I work in a high-volume document delivery operation, and no matter how good the procedures and processes, things slip through the cracks. Statistically improbable though it is, there always seems to be one poor patron every so often who appears to get picked on--it seems like every possible thing that can go wrong does go wrong for several requests in a row. I have great sympathy for people who seem to get it right for everyone except me until it's proven to be personal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Previous
56 (41.5%)