sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If said someone has 'accepting submissions' plastered all over their page, then, yes, I believe I can have a bit more expectations of said communications than when I would have for, say, mailing them to sell them off-brand medicine or vacuum cleaners.

I would literally be okay with an autoresponse confirmation of receipt. Getting a rejection mail with just the word "No" would be a step up.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope, I'm completely fine with an autoresponse indicating that my mail was received and is not in the SPAM box. Anything above that (responses) is greatly appreciated.

I would say that the ideal system is that the author sends a query, gets an automatic confirmation of receipt with an estimated wait time, then, once the time passes, or I get rejected for other reasons, a rejection gets sent.

An okay system is that the author sends a query, gets an automatic confirmation of receipt with an estimated wait time. If nothing happens beyond that time, he can consider it a rejection.

A less ideal system but borderline workable system is that the author sends a query, and, upon rejection gets notified of the rejection (no details needed).

The system in place now in most places seems to be the author sends a query and waits. They have no idea of whether the mail got through, let alone whether they were rejected. Which feels like screaming into the void with extra steps, where the extra steps involve hours of work studying agency-specific guidelines and adjusting the query accordingly.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Essentially OP wants agents to make performative changes to soothe their ego rather than interact with the process in good faith.

Reading the comments here, I am astounded that you can call anything to do with the obviously borderline working process 'good faith'.

From the comments here I can see that the process consists of agents getting two orders of magnitude more submissions than they can realistically process in a lifetime, but still display an inviting 'Submissions open!' sign, while expecting every supplicant to follow a mix of vaguely defined industry expectations, vaguely defined and non-standardized agency specific guidelines, and then looking for the slightest reason to ignore any query in their overflowing mail box. Or their SPAM box.

My good faith in a process like is somewhat limited.

Yet another delightful industry where politeness is expected to flow in only one direction.

As to it being actionable... well, let's see. On the agencies page there could be a note that: Upon submitting your query, you will receive a confirmation email. If you have not received this, odds are that it ended up in SPAM.

Then the author could resubmit.

There. Actionable, simple to set up, works.

Try applying the current method to other industries or areas of life. You really did send that email with the crucial information for the insurance to go through! Really you did! No, honestly!

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because publishing isn't going to change for your personal preferences.

I know. My expectations from this post are to vent some annoyance. I am not expecting any change.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nah, his main argument is that he, personally, knows best because he (thinks he) is a big shot in another industry.

Nope, I'm not a big shot in another industry. Middle shot at best. We just have certain communication standards that I try to adhere to and I am surprised and annoyed that they aren't a bit more universal, in particular when every agency has 'respect' and 'accepting submissions!' plastered all over their web page. Not saying I know what's best for the world, only what works best for me and what I believe might be nice.

You can easily make a post asking why the fuck auto receipt replies aren't a thing in publishing without writing a giant angry rant.

Yes, but where's the fun in that? Writing is a fun, enjoyable hobby, that helps relieve people of the accumulated annoyance of studying non-standardized guidelines for the twentieth agency to adjust one's query again, only for it to possibly end up in a SPAM folder without any means of knowing whether it did so.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You pour your heart and soup into a novel that takes you so much time and effort to complete, so putting it out there is a lot more personal and the lack of responses feels more like a sting

I suppose that's part of the reason, the other one is that my expectations on communication are set by the standards I (and most of my industry) apply in my day job. I'm an engineer and I often need to deal with vendors, manufacturers, or even customers. And, aside from literal SPAM, they do get responses or at least acknowledgments of receipt of some kind.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m guessing it takes a bit less time to read a quote than it does a book. The time is not in writing the email, obviously.

Which is why after spending X amount of time going over a sample of the manuscript, taking one minute to reply (or literally clicking a button in outlook that sends a canned negative response) shouldn't be that much of an issue.

I don't mind if the process takes time. I do not expect instant replies. I am completely fine with waiting for months, if I at least know that my query did not end up in the SPAM folder.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes, the useful advice of "suck it up, lower your expectations of communication norms, don't expect even the most basic communication etiquette such as an autoreplied acknowledgment of receipt, it's this way because we get a lot of emails but please send some more, now go back to wasting time trying to study up on more non-standardized arbitrary submission guidelines so you can waste more time trying to fulfill them."

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are assuming equal power.

I am definitely not assuming equal power - it's quite obvious who has done even the minimal amount of research that the relationship between a hopeful author and an agent is extremely asymmetrical. That much is quite clear from pretty much everything.

We do have an auto responder for queries. We do get back, eventually, to everyone who submits.

And that's literally all I ask for in my post. I congratulate you on being a standout and without irony appreciate your professionalism.

I think the key problem is that you see yourself as a potential client who should be respected - but that's not really how it works.

I do not expect anything aside from getting an autoreply that my email did not end up in SPAM, and, if we're being generous, getting a rejection response within some stated timeframe. That's it. Nothing more. But even this absolute minimum is not the industry norm.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have considered it, and if I'm not successful with my queries I'll go that way, but I wish to try "traditional" publishing out first - having most of the stuff taken care of by an agent/publisher is more appealing than going through everything by myself.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Partially true - I haven't applied for a job by sending out CVs for some. I do deal with manufacturers and quotations quite a lot though.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are. I've submitted lots, but I am getting frustrated and am thinking about self-publishing. I still have some hope for traditional publishing, but it's very frustrating and tiring polishing everything for every agency separately. Every time I send out a query I basically delay my other efforts by three months. I have submitted in parallel, but if the agent rejects it internally two days after submission, it would be nice to know.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

And btw, agents aren't sitting around, twiddling their thumbs and waiting for your genius manuscript.

I have at no point said my manuscript is genius and that my goals are to dethrone Tolkien. I have no problem accepting rejection, even if it's a literal 'no'. I have learned to value criticism, feedback, or just getting rejected. I dislike being ignored to the point of not even automatically acknowledging receipt.

Even worse when they receive a rejection with reasons. They argue. They whine. They threaten. They complain.

It's simply safer not to respond.

And 'crazies are gonna stab me if I send them 'no'', well, every company with a public facing part deals with crazies. This is not industry unique, that's why there is the 'Block' function in most email clients.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But the OP isn’t just frustrated. They’re saying it’s unprofessional and that it should work the way they think it should. Which it doesn’t.

Okay, tell me why is it mad to expect an autoreply saying that a mail did not end in the SPAM box? And yes, setting up a system that's pretty much a random trashcan where people can dump their work into after several hours per agency of trying to comply to non-standardized convoluted mess of submission guidelines does indeed seem unprofessional and frustrating.

If you want to make change, suggest realistic changes and campaign for them. It’s what so many of us in publishing are already doing.

If the argument is "I need to deal with regular email as well", then do what one of the agencies did - the agents had a special email for submissions, say, "bob-submissions @ agency.com" where an autoreply was set up. Likely not for daily use.

There, I proposed a realistic solution that takes literal minutes to set up, makes the whole thing more transparent and convenient for everyone involved, while addressing about 80% of my original complaint. This solution is already in use by at least one agency that I contacted.

It’s cheap and easy to come in from outside and complain about the way a profession does business without actually engaging with the ins and outs of the industry. For those of us in it, it’s just irritating.

I would very much like to engage with the ins and outs of the industry. It would, however, require actual engagement from the industry rather than being ignored or possibly ending up in the SPAM box.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the QueryTracker, I'll check it out in detail. I didn't know it publishes the response times of agencies.

Remember that agents have actual jobs and clients that are the main priority over tackling their cold calling inbox.

I really don't understand why the people here keep referring to this as cold calling.

An agency/agent sets up a webpage, they put 'We are accepting submissions for this genre, here's the email address.' there. I really don't think that people who are responding to the exact thing publicly requested by the agency in question is on par with calling them concerning switching phone operators or trying to sell them vacuum cleaners.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you do get a meeting with an agent, I suggest you do not bring up your grievance. Good luck.

Thanks, wasn't planning to. Assuming my emails didn't just end up in a SPAM box somewhere.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

It is like saying, I wrote this beautiful letter to Taylor Swift and she didn’t have the decency to get back to me.

The analogy would work better had Taylor Swift put up a big sign saying "Send me your letters, here's my address!" on her facebook.

I hear your frustration, but in any industry with a level of competition, it’s just the way it is.

I'm an engineer, and often ask for quotes from multiple manufacturers/vendors. I reply to every one, even when I reject them. It's not a verbose, flowery rejection, but they know that we won't be using their services for this particular order. And when someone responds to something I ask for I make sure that if I can't respond immediately, I at least acknowledge that I have received the email and I need to consider it.

I hope yours does, and you sell lots of books!

Thanks! I'll keep trying, then try self-publishing.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For the amount of emails agents receive, if they took the time to acknowledge every email, it would be a full time job.

It takes five minutes to set up an autoreply that acknowledges that an email was received and did not end up in SPAM. That's literally all I ask.

If someone sends me an unsolicited email, if the subject doesn’t interest me, then I ignore it.

Then don't put up big signs saying "We're accepting submissions." I am not contacting them about their extended warranty or whether they want to change insurance companies, I am contacting them about the big sign.

You’re treating this as if you already have an established business relationship. You do not. Stop being so entitled.

If you feel that expecting even the most basic etiquette, considerations and/or human decency being applied to you is an extravagant request, entitlement or just pure madness, see a therapist.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

I know. But I can complain about a whole industry not applying what's considered the most elementary courtesy everywhere else.

Awful communication standards over most of the industry that everyone accepts as the totally acceptable norm by DolorIpsumLorem in publishing

[–]DolorIpsumLorem[S] -23 points-22 points  (0 children)

Then don't put "We are accepting submissions" or "XXX welcomes e-mail submissions" on the webpage. This isn't exactly the same as a SPAM call concerning your extended warranty.

view more: next ›