Peeking my head up from the practice of law with some good news and some bad news.
The good news is that my Memphis Lovecraftian poem, "
Memphis Street Railway Co. v. Stratton: 1915", originally published at
New Myths, was nominated for a 2013 Rhysling Award by some wonderful soul. (It also got
some lovely praise from very talented poet and editor
(
Read more... )
Reply
Explaining the mistakes that led to the situation being deplored is nice, but explaining doesn't excuse. The words "I'm" and "sorry" should be somewhere in this post and I'm not seeing them.
The errors are regrettable, you say? How marvelously passive! Who regrets them? Not you specifically, it doesn't seem. But they are regrettable, so we should fee free to regret them quietly at our leisure?
Also, "as [I/he] thought" suggests that things actually happened in accordance with thought. That's why people say "Just as I thought!" when something they thought turns out to be true. It seems to me like what you're trying to say is that you thought the proof was sent out to contributors when it wasn't, and David Kopaska-Merkel thought he'd gotten all the contributors, when ( ... )
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Everyone involved with the Rhysling Anthology, including myself, is sorry that errors occurred. These errors were primarily due to unforeseeable events (John Mannone's illness and handing over the layout to a second person [me] in mid-production) rather than incompetence. Revising the process used for nominating will prevent or mitigate the impact of such events on future Rhysling Anthologies.
Again, SFPA would love to have more volunteers who think the status quo can be improved upon and more participating members.
Reply
Reply
1.) I second everything alexandraerin said, and I find it curious that you ignore her valid points. Further, although you may not realize it, ignoring alexandraerin is a bad move professionally. Her fandom is enormous and quite likely to appreciate speculative poetry. If SFPA actually wants to broaden its influence, not engaging with creators who have considerable power to benefit your organization if they so choose is simply a bad idea ( ... )
Reply
9.) David Kopaska-Merkel has actually apologized for his role in these errors. You have not. Again, telling. Further, I agree with cafenowhere that your tone is not at all in line with David's tone in addressing this issue publically and privately, and as a prominent SFPA volunteer, this is something you might wish to consider.
10.) Again, not all poets were contacted; at least one was omitted. It is only at this point that you state that "SFPA does take these errors seriously." This is directly contradicted by your downplaying of the errors as "only five poems" earlier in your comment.
11.) You may be right about some of the errors cropping up because of nominators being required to give the text of the poem. However, I know for a fact that was not the case with my poem, because there was an error in the published version with New Myths that I only noticed when reviewing the poem after hearing about the nomination. I ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment