to get the decklist to show up properly you first have to hit the source button which turns your entire article into html, then paste it in where you want it, then hit source again. this was an easily answered question you could have asked any of the writers on this site. Im sure someone from here or who has written here is online at some point in time throughout the day.
No it is on you the writer, this site does not have an editor it has a content managaer. All the tools are in client to help you and the writers will also help you if u have questions. i didnt hate the article. just the fact that you didnt take time to make it good. also if your gonna do something like this you have to have some meat to it. i guaentee that cedrics article was no where near this short.
My mistake was actually not linking to Cedric Phillips' original article.
Grammatical errors? The tournament report was meant to be written that way, that is the style, one that was obviously poorly received.
I understand if someone doesn't like a particular style, that is fair enough, I know not to try it again.
This was not something I did simply to get some quick credits, I took the opportunity to write an article similar to that of one of my all time favourite articles from one of my favourite authors, and it obviously didn't go down well. Perhaps I should have done this later down the road, so that you all knew I am capable of producing a quality article. Everyone makes mistakes.
As for the decklist, I mentioned to the editor in the comments that it was appearing that way and couldn't fix it. Isn't it the job of the editor to pick up on stuff like that?
That's pretty true - Paul brought up a valid point that Josh doesn't have strong incentive to edit/provide constructive feedback, but even if that's the case, it takes almost no effort to reject an article and write "this doesn't cut it, try again." Even if we don't have a true editing process in place, we should at least have a gatekeeper.
I guess I'm the only one willing to call people out, but a lot of this needs to be directed at the person who published this article to begin with. we all know its not as good as it should be...but why was it put up today when it isnt even average? This shouldnt have made it pass whoever is doing the editing and publishing here in the first place.
Note I never said doing a podcast was easy, I said it requires different skills, which I'm sure you would agree with. Im sure the podcast is good, I just dont play classic so I never devoted 50-70 minutes of my day listening to it over music. as far as the quality of articles being published, I hate to say it, but it's not the author's fault. If they write bad articles then they shouldn't have those things published in the first place.
(For the record, clan magic eternal was whiffy, but I do not disagree with his points [make sure to sign by your handle next time georgie!])
Ripster88, you really should be ashamed. We do spend roughly 4-8 hours a week between coordination, editing, scripting, research, etc to do our podcast. I could literally do what you did in about 4-5 minutes with any random classic deck. The difference between us is I would be ashamed to vomit something like that to a site in order to obtain some credit.
ShardFenix, enough coddling. How about if people submit things they should be ready for backlash. You cannot use real life money as an incentive then have no room for any criticism, it's called real life. We got flamed pretty hard after our second cast, and like hammer said we took the criticism and ran with it.
Time to grow up boys, put in some work or stop posting.
I agree with everything here - I brought this up earlier this week in a comment at the Sudo Infinity column, but probably put it up a tad late and didn't get any backup, just Paul's rejoinder that everyone should be allowed a voice because this is Magic on "open mic" - glad to see that there's a large contingent that is demanding both quality and effort from fellow authors. If we keep this up we just might push the site into a new, healthier direction!
I kind of have to echo this sentiment. I drive myself insane trying to get my articles to look and read as best they can, and once they're up and I start seeing grammatical errors I still kick myself because the submission wasn't 100% perfect. I would have never, ever submitted something where the opening decklist only appears as ugly HTML code. I'd be too embarrassed.
The most constructive criticism I can offer to the author is this: Be as perfectionist with your articles as you are with your decks. Previewing your work here is akin to playtesting your list out there. Making sure all your basic lands are the the same artist is akin to taking the time to making sure your article looks good. Also, I find my writing and my deckbuilding improves when I "sleep on it" and come back with fresh eyes. Give it a shot and I wish you luck in the future.
have you looked at the soap operas. its a pod cast sure, but its also an article. as part of the podcast team, who is also an author i have to say meh at you. and doing a podcast is much harder then an article. do u have any idea how hard it is to coordinate 3 poeple on 2 diff continents in 3 different timeszones? then find content to talk about, fill out an article bodie then edit a 50-70 min piece? weekly? before you say anything else think about that, and yes i know that you use to write here as well, and your articles were not the hardest to write either, 4 decklists and 10 paragraphs is not hard to do.
this article desrves to be shit on. as does every article that isnt the best it could be. if this guy had made sure that his decklist was visible, then i would at least give him an a for effort on trying out a new style. however the decklist screams of a 10 min job that he couldnt even be bothered to edit.
please, for the love of the game and the site, please be more careful with your articles. this is insane. How many times did you read and edit this? 0? whatever with the report, but comon for the decklist. you cant even be bothred to check and see if your decklist is visible?
i know that this isnt a pro site, but stuff like this is just a shame.
look guys, this goes for everyone, and sorry if it looks like im picking on this author, but just becasue this site will put up anything dosent mean you should submit anything. if u want to write an article make it the best you can make it, i feel like this is just a huige slap in the face to all the readers and the writers who spent actual time and effort on making good content.
OK just because the author is right and the Cedric Phillips report he tried to emulate is fantastic I re-read it. Now I must vent a little: Perhaps we as authors, shouldn't try to emulate others work. There is a huge disconnect between the quality of the two reports. Your first article was good. You have your own style and should work on polishing that over trying to tribute another author's work. I think you have the skills necessary to possess an interesting series here, but do it in your own voice.
It seems like you just put this together in a few minutes to get some MtgoTraders credits. You could do a lot to beef up a tournament report like this.
Lose Game 2. Happens.
Win Game 3. Justice.
This is not a satisfactory way to sum up a game, in my opinion. Tell us what happened in these games. Make some notes in between rounds. Or watch them afterward and get the details of the games. Throw some pictures in there.
I actually do agree with what you just said. I was just saying instead of flaming the article, add constructive criticism. Maybe he can write good articles. Maybe he just needs tips.
Did you enjoy the article? Did you feel the time spent reading was worthwhile, do you feel enlightened about the world of pauper goblins? Does this inspire you to play the format? I love Puremtgo I want to see great content and increased readership. What would you say to someone that stumbles across this site and the first article they happen up on is this one? - You are correct that I have not submitted a word article since 2009 (i took a 9 month break from the game) and only returned late 2010. Since the start of the year I have been a co-host on the Classic-Format Podcast Yagmoths Soap Opera (we actively welcome negative feedback were appropriate so that we can improve the series, for example episode 2 was critisied for the way we delivered a set review and this will be taken on board for the next set). My motives are not to troll, but to weed the site of utter garbage like this which I personally feel harms the sites reputation and growth.
The writer stated he was simply emulating the style of an older Cedric Phillips article. I ca respect that. The article wasn't great and due to the first report style could have used a second DE report in a more in-depth look, however, as I said, there is difference between him just coming on here and shitting on the article versus mentioning something constructive that could help the author write a better article next time.
And meh I haven't listened to the Yawgmoth podcasts...also, doing a podcast is separate from the skills needing to write an article.
Sure thing. I'm waiting for you to really work out the Shape Anew deck (because I'm just lazy that way), while waiting for the price of the Colossus to go down a little bit before buying it. Also, I would probably have to replace Elspeth with something cheaper. Please, write about the deck again in the future. It's potentially something that can move to standard, since it's an overall stronger concept than the other SOM archetypes (except Tezz, obviously, but that's actually a downgrade from standard already).
to get the decklist to show up properly you first have to hit the source button which turns your entire article into html, then paste it in where you want it, then hit source again. this was an easily answered question you could have asked any of the writers on this site. Im sure someone from here or who has written here is online at some point in time throughout the day.
No it is on you the writer, this site does not have an editor it has a content managaer. All the tools are in client to help you and the writers will also help you if u have questions. i didnt hate the article. just the fact that you didnt take time to make it good. also if your gonna do something like this you have to have some meat to it. i guaentee that cedrics article was no where near this short.
My mistake was actually not linking to Cedric Phillips' original article.
Grammatical errors? The tournament report was meant to be written that way, that is the style, one that was obviously poorly received.
I understand if someone doesn't like a particular style, that is fair enough, I know not to try it again.
This was not something I did simply to get some quick credits, I took the opportunity to write an article similar to that of one of my all time favourite articles from one of my favourite authors, and it obviously didn't go down well. Perhaps I should have done this later down the road, so that you all knew I am capable of producing a quality article. Everyone makes mistakes.
As for the decklist, I mentioned to the editor in the comments that it was appearing that way and couldn't fix it. Isn't it the job of the editor to pick up on stuff like that?
That's pretty true - Paul brought up a valid point that Josh doesn't have strong incentive to edit/provide constructive feedback, but even if that's the case, it takes almost no effort to reject an article and write "this doesn't cut it, try again." Even if we don't have a true editing process in place, we should at least have a gatekeeper.
I guess I'm the only one willing to call people out, but a lot of this needs to be directed at the person who published this article to begin with. we all know its not as good as it should be...but why was it put up today when it isnt even average? This shouldnt have made it pass whoever is doing the editing and publishing here in the first place.
Note I never said doing a podcast was easy, I said it requires different skills, which I'm sure you would agree with. Im sure the podcast is good, I just dont play classic so I never devoted 50-70 minutes of my day listening to it over music. as far as the quality of articles being published, I hate to say it, but it's not the author's fault. If they write bad articles then they shouldn't have those things published in the first place.
To echo the sentiments of all above, I concur.
(For the record, clan magic eternal was whiffy, but I do not disagree with his points [make sure to sign by your handle next time georgie!])
Ripster88, you really should be ashamed. We do spend roughly 4-8 hours a week between coordination, editing, scripting, research, etc to do our podcast. I could literally do what you did in about 4-5 minutes with any random classic deck. The difference between us is I would be ashamed to vomit something like that to a site in order to obtain some credit.
ShardFenix, enough coddling. How about if people submit things they should be ready for backlash. You cannot use real life money as an incentive then have no room for any criticism, it's called real life. We got flamed pretty hard after our second cast, and like hammer said we took the criticism and ran with it.
Time to grow up boys, put in some work or stop posting.
I agree with everything here - I brought this up earlier this week in a comment at the Sudo Infinity column, but probably put it up a tad late and didn't get any backup, just Paul's rejoinder that everyone should be allowed a voice because this is Magic on "open mic" - glad to see that there's a large contingent that is demanding both quality and effort from fellow authors. If we keep this up we just might push the site into a new, healthier direction!
I kind of have to echo this sentiment. I drive myself insane trying to get my articles to look and read as best they can, and once they're up and I start seeing grammatical errors I still kick myself because the submission wasn't 100% perfect. I would have never, ever submitted something where the opening decklist only appears as ugly HTML code. I'd be too embarrassed.
The most constructive criticism I can offer to the author is this: Be as perfectionist with your articles as you are with your decks. Previewing your work here is akin to playtesting your list out there. Making sure all your basic lands are the the same artist is akin to taking the time to making sure your article looks good. Also, I find my writing and my deckbuilding improves when I "sleep on it" and come back with fresh eyes. Give it a shot and I wish you luck in the future.
my gawd the amount of work and detail. love it, even though i rarely even watch edh let alone play it.
it looks like a block version of a std deck that was featured in the last scg 5k. maybe erman never saw it, but this is not a new idea.
have you looked at the soap operas. its a pod cast sure, but its also an article. as part of the podcast team, who is also an author i have to say meh at you. and doing a podcast is much harder then an article. do u have any idea how hard it is to coordinate 3 poeple on 2 diff continents in 3 different timeszones? then find content to talk about, fill out an article bodie then edit a 50-70 min piece? weekly? before you say anything else think about that, and yes i know that you use to write here as well, and your articles were not the hardest to write either, 4 decklists and 10 paragraphs is not hard to do.
this article desrves to be shit on. as does every article that isnt the best it could be. if this guy had made sure that his decklist was visible, then i would at least give him an a for effort on trying out a new style. however the decklist screams of a 10 min job that he couldnt even be bothered to edit.
please, for the love of the game and the site, please be more careful with your articles. this is insane. How many times did you read and edit this? 0? whatever with the report, but comon for the decklist. you cant even be bothred to check and see if your decklist is visible?
i know that this isnt a pro site, but stuff like this is just a shame.
look guys, this goes for everyone, and sorry if it looks like im picking on this author, but just becasue this site will put up anything dosent mean you should submit anything. if u want to write an article make it the best you can make it, i feel like this is just a huige slap in the face to all the readers and the writers who spent actual time and effort on making good content.
cool thx
The last time I played paper was when M10 was released and that was a blast. I work nights so I do not get the opportunity to go but it was fun
OK just because the author is right and the Cedric Phillips report he tried to emulate is fantastic I re-read it. Now I must vent a little: Perhaps we as authors, shouldn't try to emulate others work. There is a huge disconnect between the quality of the two reports. Your first article was good. You have your own style and should work on polishing that over trying to tribute another author's work. I think you have the skills necessary to possess an interesting series here, but do it in your own voice.
Phillips article for reference: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/extended/20046_Insider_Information_Pr...
Lol at the FoW comment.
The Shape Anew deck looks really fun. I'm a little confused though was it your idea to put it in a control shell like that is that all you?
Either way fun article and I can't wait for the next one.
It seems like you just put this together in a few minutes to get some MtgoTraders credits. You could do a lot to beef up a tournament report like this.
Lose Game 2. Happens.
Win Game 3. Justice.
This is not a satisfactory way to sum up a game, in my opinion. Tell us what happened in these games. Make some notes in between rounds. Or watch them afterward and get the details of the games. Throw some pictures in there.
I actually do agree with what you just said. I was just saying instead of flaming the article, add constructive criticism. Maybe he can write good articles. Maybe he just needs tips.
Did you enjoy the article? Did you feel the time spent reading was worthwhile, do you feel enlightened about the world of pauper goblins? Does this inspire you to play the format? I love Puremtgo I want to see great content and increased readership. What would you say to someone that stumbles across this site and the first article they happen up on is this one? - You are correct that I have not submitted a word article since 2009 (i took a 9 month break from the game) and only returned late 2010. Since the start of the year I have been a co-host on the Classic-Format Podcast Yagmoths Soap Opera (we actively welcome negative feedback were appropriate so that we can improve the series, for example episode 2 was critisied for the way we delivered a set review and this will be taken on board for the next set). My motives are not to troll, but to weed the site of utter garbage like this which I personally feel harms the sites reputation and growth.
The writer stated he was simply emulating the style of an older Cedric Phillips article. I ca respect that. The article wasn't great and due to the first report style could have used a second DE report in a more in-depth look, however, as I said, there is difference between him just coming on here and shitting on the article versus mentioning something constructive that could help the author write a better article next time.
And meh I haven't listened to the Yawgmoth podcasts...also, doing a podcast is separate from the skills needing to write an article.
Exactly my point! :D
Otherwise, why Turn Aside over Force of Will? :P
Sure thing. I'm waiting for you to really work out the Shape Anew deck (because I'm just lazy that way), while waiting for the price of the Colossus to go down a little bit before buying it. Also, I would probably have to replace Elspeth with something cheaper. Please, write about the deck again in the future. It's potentially something that can move to standard, since it's an overall stronger concept than the other SOM archetypes (except Tezz, obviously, but that's actually a downgrade from standard already).
Lol Shard, he has been part of the Yawgmoth Podcast series and we as the readers have a right to complain about the content.
The longer bad content is allowed to surface the more chance this website risks of losing readers.
Before you rant on about something you are clueless about, you should probably get your facts straight.