Jonny Nexus said:
I'm curious.
I was always taught that good writing involves using the fewest words possible. If I could describe something in 100 words, but there's another way I could describe it in 50 words that describes it just as well, then I should pick the 50 word option.
So we writers spend our childhood trying to make our "stories" as long as possible, and our adulthood trying to make them as short as possible.
Agreed.
And yet you firstly appear to be marketting your book on the basis of how long it is,
While I understand why you (and others) could make such an error, it is indeed an error. I have not marketed the book based on how long it is. This was an issue during the creative process only because its ever-increasing length from the planned page count resulted in a publication delay. People who were interested in the book continally asked me for updates, including the page count. You'll note that the actual
product page doesn't reference the book's length other than a simple notation of page count at the end, which is standard.
and secondly wrote an opening section to this post:
[snip]
...which could have been much more efficiently written as:
[snip]
I felt the preamble was necessary as context for those who might have seen the original RPGnet posts. You'll note that my second effort at RGPnet I essentially did exactly what you're suggesting.
How can I put this..? Assuming that you genuinely weren't attempting to market your product in your post* but were instead simply asking a question, well I'm starting to wonder about how good the quality of the writing might be in your product.
Put simply: is it 540 pages of waffle that could have been more efficiently written in, say, 300 pages?
No need to worry. While I wrote the post, Lee Hammock wrote the book; I think his record speaks for himself.
*I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, partly because I'm making a point based on what you are claiming, and partly because if I don't you might accuse me of making a personal attack by calling you a liar. (Although to be fair, it's only a personal attack if you genuinely aren't lying - if you are, then it's merely an observation).
I disagree. Calling someone a liar gratuitously is a personal attack even if it's true. It's gratuitous if it's unnecessary to the issue at hand. In this case, Joe could have simply reported the post, and his issue would have been resolved. Calling me a liar to boot was unnecessary. Similarly, your insinuation is also gratuitous because the thread has already been moved, the issue you raise is not appropriate for the thread, and Morrus has specifically asked that it not be discussed further.
People, there's a link to the Circus Maximus Bash-Justin thread above. If you want to have your fun, go there and post away. I'll ask again, listen to Morrus, please stay on topic.
