As it says on my author page, I want constructive criticism. If there's something that reduced your enjoyment of my story, I want to know what that thing was. Some authors disagree with me, and would rather receive criticism via PM or not at all. I can sympathize with the former, but the latter strikes me as self-defeating; if you don't know where there's room for improvement, you will never improve.
Of course, there's a difference between constructive and destructive criticism. Constructive criticism might read like:
"This was an interesting premise, and I liked the exchange of witticisms leading up to the spanking at the end. The way she changed her mind so quickly seemed out-of-character though; perhaps you could have gotten into her head a little more to let us understand what she was thinking, or lengthened the conversation to give her more time before making the decision. Either way, a fun read."
Constructive criticism should point out what the flaws were specifically, propose a way of working on or avoiding them in the future, and serve the critique along with some praise for the stories more successful elements.
Whereas destructive criticism is more like:
"The way she acted didn't make any sense. This story sucks."
Or:
"Yeah, I think you have some practice ahead of you. Nice try kiddo."
Or my personal favorite:
"I don't like adult M/F stories, but I read your clearly marked and validated adult M/F story anyway just to complain about how it isn't to my taste." |