HarperCollins's Authonomy site

[Graeme]

HarperCollins in the UK have started an interesting new site: Authonomy.

 

As far as I can determine, what they've done is to take the idea of reviewing new author submissions and outsourced it to the Internet. They're looking for readers to recommend new stories so HarperCollins can pick them up and publish them.

 

I still can't work out if this is a cynical exercise, or a a clever use of the Internet. I did notice that they have "gay" as one of the genres.

 

I doubt I'll be submitting any of my stories to the site, at least not now, but I'm not adverse to the idea.

 

Any comments?

 

PS: I've just mentioned this site to my wife and she's reminded me that she'd like a Ferrari. I might end up submitting something....

Edited September 6, 2008 by Graeme

[Libby Drew]

HarperCollins in the UK have started an interesting new site: Authonomy.

 

As far as I can determine, what they've done is to take the idea of reviewing new author submissions and outsourced it to the Internet. They're looking for readers to recommend new stories so HarperCollins can pick them up and publish them.

 

I still can't work out if this is a cynical exercise, or a a clever use of the Internet. I did notice that they have "gay" as one of the genres.

 

I doubt I'll be submitting any of my stories to the site, at least not now, but I'm not adverse to the idea.

 

Any comments?

 

PS: I've just mentioned this site to my wife and she's reminded me that she'd like a Ferrari. I might end up submitting something....

 

Hi Graeme!

 

This site was brought to my attention again yesterday by a friend on LiveJournal. I reviewed the TOS and feel carefully optimistic that this could be a fun experience, if nothing else. I, too, was encouraged that they included Gay Literature on their genre list. Well, I signed up -- just to read for now, but I'm eager to poke around the site.

 

Did you end up submitting? I'd be curious to hear your experiences, if so.

 

Thanks!

 

~Libby

[Graeme]

Did you end up submitting? I'd be curious to hear your experiences, if so.

Not yet, and I'm not rushing into anything. My wife has waited this long for a Ferrari, she can wait a little longer

[DEMO]

Not yet, and I'm not rushing into anything. My wife has waited this long for a Ferrari, she can wait a little longer

 

 

I feel like I sort of rushed in. I posted my 10,000 words and was pretty happy with it. Then I realized that maintaining two "live" versions of my work was going to be a real pain. So I removed my book for now. But I am still trying to be active in the forums in case I change my mind.

 

They are a fun group. You can join and kick around for a while before uploading your book.

[Libby Drew]

I feel like I sort of rushed in. I posted my 10,000 words and was pretty happy with it. Then I realized that maintaining two "live" versions of my work was going to be a real pain. So I removed my book for now. But I am still trying to be active in the forums in case I change my mind.

 

They are a fun group. You can join and kick around for a while before uploading your book.

 

Thanks for letting me know. I'm still in the watch and wait mode, but you're right about the forums. That would be a great place to start to get a feel for the place.

 

I appreciate the info!

[DEMO]

I posted last night that I had removed my story.

 

And I had.

 

Today I had second thoughts. So I put the darn thing back up.

 

~rolling the dice~

[MikeL]

HarperCollins in the UK have started an interesting new site: Authonomy.

Did you end up submitting? I'd be curious to hear your experiences, if so.

~Libby

Kit has posted Tapping on the Harper Collins site. See Richard Lyons post: https://www.gayauthors.org/forums/index.php...c=20914&hl=

[Richard Lyon]

I've been exploring the Authonomy site. Of the top 20 books for the entire site two of them are tagged as gay. This seems to indicate that it is a mainstream site with a user community very open to gay writing. The forums have some interesting discussions on the nuts and bolts of writing and publishing. Even for people who don't want to put their stories there, it's worth a visit.

[kitten]

Kit has posted Tapping on the Harper Collins site. See Richard Lyons post: https://www.gayauthors.org/forums/index.php...c=20914&hl=

 

Now I've had time to explore the authonomy site, I've noticed a few things. e.g.

None of the top 13 in the 'all genres' category are completed and only 1 of the top 5 in the gay genre category are completed. This means that people are supporting ('voting for') books of which they've read only the first few chapters.

 

On further exploration of the forums, I found that incomplete does not usually mean the book is unfinished, but that the author hopes to get published and so does not intend to post the last few chapters online, because that would 'give away' the ending. This might seem a reasonable approach for the author, but it isn't so good for the reader.

 

If the book is published you have to buy the book to read the ending. That may be reasonable, but only a tiny proportion of the books on the site will be published, so if you start reading the vast majority of incompletes you will never, ever get to know how it ends. Personally, I'm not going to waste my time starting a book when I know that I'm extremely unlikely ever to see the ending. That means, of course, that I'm not going to 'support' it or 'vote' for it.

 

When I brought this point up in the forum, a couple of people responded that the majority of readers there only ever read the first 2 or 3 chapters, even of completed books. They reckon that is enough to get a sample of the style and quality, at least enough to decide if it's worth supporting, and they are not really interested in how it ends. Personally, I've read several books that started well but fizzled out, and I think that a good ending is just as important as a good beginning. Would you judge a box of chocolates based just on the quality of the chocolate covering, regardless of what the filling inside it might be?

 

Of course, I have no way of knowing whether or not they people on authonomy who responded to my post on this were representative of all readers who support books on the site, and I don't know if their claim is true that most readers don't want to read more than 2 or 3 chapters. However, if it they are representative and if their claim is true, then I don't have much confidence in the ratings on the site.

 

Kit

[Richard Lyon]

When I brought this point up in the forum, a couple of people responded that the majority of readers there only ever read the first 2 or 3 chapters, even of completed books. They reckon that is enough to get a sample of the style and quality, at least enough to decide if it's worth supporting, and they are not really interested in how it ends. Personally, I've read several books that started well but fizzled out, and I think that a good ending is just as important as a good beginning. Would you judge a box of chocolates based just on the quality of the chocolate covering, regardless of what the filling inside it might be?

 

Of course, I have no way of knowing whether or not they people on authonomy who responded to my post on this were representative of all readers who support books on the site, and I don't know if their claim is true that most readers don't want to read more than 2 or 3 chapters. However, if it they are representative and if their claim is true, then I don't have much confidence in the ratings on the site.

 

Kit

 

The site is quite new. It's only been open to the public about a month. Prior to that it had three months of invitation only beta testing. As it attracts new users the make up of the place is likely to change. I doubt that anything could really be considered "standard" practice there yet.

 

It's always interesting to watch change on the internet. People who registered for a site more than a month ago consider themselves old hands and get their feathers ruffled when newbies come along wanting to change things.

[DEMO]

Of course, I have no way of knowing whether or not they people on authonomy who responded to my post on this were representative of all readers who support books on the site, and I don't know if their claim is true that most readers don't want to read more than 2 or 3 chapters. However, if it they are representative and if their claim is true, then I don't have much confidence in the ratings on the site.

 

Kit

 

Whether it is incomplete or complete, in the context of Authonomy, makes no difference.

 

The point of Authonomy is to make the work of the junior editors -- the Slush Pile tenders -- easier. This is about peer review, being able to last and (sometimes) schmoozing. Everything we read (those of us who are still unpublished) tells us that the work is not the writing, the work is in getting it published.

 

Which makes me feel a little nauseous .

 

Presumably we are being asked to look at the work in the context of (a) is this work salable and ( is it publishable. Much of it isn't. And doesn't get watchlisted or bookshelved. Some work does and that should be about the about A & B ~and~ the writer's ability.

 

Along the same lines Agents, in an effort to assess our standard, salability in general and specifically, ask for a query. Then a sample or a partial and then, maybe, a full. I think this is sort of the same thing. They want to see that we can DO it first. Then they may (though I understand that it hasn't happened yet) ask for a full.

 

There does seem to be a difference of opinion relative to 'publishing' ones entire work to the web. One agent, via a comment stream, told me that it was a question of being able to sell to the public what the writer has already given away. Then, on Authonomy there was a post about someone's work being stolen and published as an E-book 'in the states'.

 

The curious thing, to me, is that Authonomy in their too-brief-FAQs, seems to infer that uploading the full MS rather than a partial is preferable and makes your work more competitive in the field of other completed novels. But if no one is reading them through it doesn't seem to matter.

 

Yet many agents, on their blogs, say that publishing it ALL makes the work worthless to them and to a publisher. It is a dichotomy. And it inspires all sorts of conspiracy theories (which I won't go into here because you guys still think I am a reasonable, sane person).

 

I wish my novel was complete. I am glad that yours is (Are? Haven't I read that you've completed multiple novels?). I applaud you. I don't think that the folks at Authonomy are ~ever~ going to read a complete UNLESS the MS is finally selected for publication.

 

But I am wrong all the time. Possibly in this very post .

 

Finally, I think that the basic problem with Authonomy is that they have writers rating the work of other writers. Not that I don't value the peer-review (I certainly do), but I think that allowing readers to READ the work and then rate it would make more sense relative to the basic fairness and overall assessment.

 

Maybe some sort of Reader review system with rewards for reviews where the rewards are books from the HC list (maybe those not doing as well?). That seems like a great idea for marketing if for no other reasons than to turn folks on to HC authors.

 

That, at the very least, would free writers up to write.

 

Dow.

Edited October 8, 2008 by DEMO

[Richard Lyon]

The media world is changing rapidly. Sales of books and newspapers are in a long term steady decline. There's still money to be made for mega stars like J K Rowling, but the opportunities in traditional publishing for the middling novelist who produces a reasonably good read are drying up.

 

The people who designed Authonomy and most of the users there seem to still be fixed in the world of traditional hardcopy publishing. The net is creating new opportunities for writers. They look, feel and smell different from the old opportunities. Up until now there has not been much non-porn mainstream fiction available on the net. Gay fiction was a notable exception. My theory about that is that there are a lot of people interested in reading gay fiction who would be afraid to go into a book store and buy it.

 

I don't know how Authonomy will develop, but its mere existence is a sign of change. I am currious as to the reasons that Harper Collins invested what has to have been a lot of money in the development of this site. Most publishers just refuse to accept unsolicited mss. I suspect that they may have some notions about ways to generate revenue from the site. Then again, maybe they are owned by a conglomerate that's in the real estate business.

[kitten]

 

The point of Authonomy is to make the work of the junior editors -- the Slush Pile tenders -- easier. This is about peer review, being able to last and (sometimes) schmoozing. Everything we read (those of us who are still unpublished) tells us that the work is not the writing, the work is in getting it published.

....

 

There does seem to be a difference of opinion relative to 'publishing' ones entire work to the web. One agent, via a comment stream, told me that it was a question of being able to sell to the public what the writer has already given away. Then, on Authonomy there was a post about someone's work being stolen and published as an E-book 'in the states'.

 

The curious thing, to me, is that Authonomy in their too-brief-FAQs, seems to infer that uploading the full MS rather than a partial is preferable and makes your work more competitive in the field of other completed novels. But if no one is reading them through it doesn't seem to matter.

 

Yet many agents, on their blogs, say that publishing it ALL makes the work worthless to them and to a publisher. It is a dichotomy. And it inspires all sorts of conspiracy theories (which I won't go into here because you guys still think I am a reasonable, sane person).

 

 

Yes, I agree with your analysis of what Authonomy is about. It's basically a filtering system which makes the work of HC junior editors easier. I'm not criticising that. After all, the purpose of a site is what the site creators and the site users want it to be. My only real criticism is that (as you say) the FAQ doesn't make it particularly clear, so I had to waste hours in forums etc before I realised what the purpose of the site really is.

 

Eventually, I realised that Authonomy isn't really the sort of place I feel comfortable.

 

My personal feeling is that most good novels and all great novels are written by authors who really want to write and who have something to say. Thoughts of publication come later, once the writing is done - they are looking for a way to publish something they have written. People who write with the primary intention of publication rarely produce anything great - they are looking to write something which is publishable. It seems to me that the authors on Authonomy are mostly in the latter category. What makes it sad is that the vast majority of them will not succeed in getting published.

 

I don't criticise the goals of those authors, but my own goal is to write stories that will touch people and that can give them pleasure. If I try hard and am really lucky I'd like to communicate the sort of feelings and experiences that we all have but which we sometimes think are feelings and experiences which we alone feel. Maybe publication would help me achieve my goal, but for me publication is not a goal in itself. If allowing people free access to my stories will get more readers than publication then I'd prefer to give the free access.

 

I wish my novel was complete. I am glad that yours is (Are? Haven't I read that you've completed multiple novels?). I applaud you. I don't think that the folks at Authonomy are ~ever~ going to read a complete UNLESS the MS is finally selected for publication.

 

 

Yes, I have 3 novels, a novella and 5 short stories all complete (and all available here on GA) and I'm currently working on a short story, a novel and a novella. From what I've gathered in my time on Authology, it seems you are correct in saying that no one on Authology will read one of my completed novels unless it is finally selected for publication. That is why I feel that Authology is not the place for me.

Kit

 

[DEMO]

What makes it sad is that the vast majority of them will not succeed in getting published.

Too true. Myself, perhaps, included . But a girl has to try.

If allowing people free access to my stories will get more readers than publication then I'd prefer to give the free access.

There are other options. I use and enjoy writing.com for example [see my signature]. I have 8 chapters there. The first three chapters are free and easy. Writing.Com encourages both readers and writers and rewards readers who also write.

 

I think you will find the same sort of basic disinterest in long works there, but you will also be better able to protect your investment.

 

Chapter 1, for me, has been 'viewed' 200 times. It was reviewed by 15 people.

Chapter 2 has been 'viewed' 57 times. It was reviewed by 7 people.

Chapter 3 has been 'viewed' 55 times. It was reviewed by 9 people.

 

The rest -- 4 to 8 -- are behind a passkey and you must email me for the passkey. IT allows me to honestly say the work ~in its entirety~ has never been published.

 

That group (behind the passkey) has been viewed at least 9 times and reviewed/rated at least twice. I say 'at least' because the WAY to review/rate changes and it becomes a more personal thing.

 

I get private messages for those.

 

I've developed a core, albeit small, readership there and those folks keep me honest (giggle) and NAG me to write more and to release more chapters.

 

The bottom line is use what works for you and what makes you happy. If what you've been doing makes you happy then by all means continue. However, if you would like to publish one day, and are concerned about your first publication rights (and the all too many all to often vague interpretations of what those are), it might be worth looking into a place like writing.com.

 

.

 

DEMO

 

P.S. May I just say that strangers on the internet are nice people. The reviews I get from folks who I've never met and who gain nothing for bothering are very nice. Even with a Gay hero I've been pleasantly surprised by the content of their emails. It is heartening, thrilling and, sometimes, quite emotional.

 

Edited October 9, 2008 by DEMO

[Libby Drew]

The media world is changing rapidly. Sales of books and newspapers are in a long term steady decline. There's still money to be made for mega stars like J K Rowling, but the opportunities in traditional publishing for the middling novelist who produces a reasonably good read are drying up.

 

The people who designed Authonomy and most of the users there seem to still be fixed in the world of traditional hardcopy publishing. The net is creating new opportunities for writers. They look, feel and smell different from the old opportunities. Up until now there has not been much non-porn mainstream fiction available on the net. Gay fiction was a notable exception. My theory about that is that there are a lot of people interested in reading gay fiction who would be afraid to go into a book store and buy it.

 

I don't know how Authonomy will develop, but its mere existence is a sign of change.

 

Yes, yes, yes. And traditional publishers are seeing the change coming, they just don't like it.

 

Also agreed on your point about gay fiction. The best of it, by far, in my opinion, is now (mostly) free and available on the net. But that's changing, too, as Internet publishers begin to pop up, so really...just a whole lot of change on the horizon.

[kitten]

Too true. Myself, perhaps, included . But a girl has to try.

 

There are other options. I use and enjoy writing.com for example [see my signature]. I have 8 chapters there. The first three chapters are free and easy. Writing.Com encourages both readers and writers and rewards readers who also write.

 

I think you will find the same sort of basic disinterest in long works there, but you will also be better able to protect your investment.

 

Chapter 1, for me, has been 'viewed' 200 times. It was reviewed by 15 people.

Chapter 2 has been 'viewed' 57 times. It was reviewed by 7 people.

Chapter 3 has been 'viewed' 55 times. It was reviewed by 9 people.

 

 

Thanks for this information!

I must admit that until I saw your sig I'd never heard of writing.com.

The main thing that makes it seem attractive to me is that, if I interpret your post correctly, it is easy to see how many times your chapters have been viewed. As far as I know, the only way for me to get this info about my chapters here on GA is to ask Myr for a monthly data file.

 

As for investment:

My two main reasons for writing are that the activity gives me pleasure and that I like to feel I'm communicating something meaningful to readers. Of course, I can only know about the latter if I get feedback. If can achieve that latter goal by giving away my work for free then I'm happy to do so.

 

On the rare occasions when the idea of getting money for writing has even occurred to me, it's never featured as a reason for writing. For a start, even in the unlikely event of publication, the amount of money it would generate would not be enough to provide an adequate compensation for my time. My time is limited and there is a finite amout of it until I die. It is more precious than money because I can possibly replace lost money but can never replace lost time. Of course I need to get enough money to live on, but beyond that I'm not prepared to sacrifice my time just for money.

 

Even if, by some miraculous fluke, my novel became published and famous, I wouldn't enjoy it. I value my privacy too much to want to be famous. The very idea of being famous makes me cringe.

 

Also, I think of my writing in the same way that I think of my cooking - I do it because I enjoy it and like to give pleasure to others. However, I'd hate to be a professional chef because doing it as a job would take all the fun out of it for me. Similarly, writing to suit the requirements of publication, or for a target audience, or to a deadline, or because it was a source my income, would turn it from a pleasure into a chore.

 

I am not, however, criticising those who want to make their living from writing, just as I don't criticise those who want to be professional chefs. Indeed, I enjoy the fruits of their professional work, whether it be in the form of a great novel or a great meal. It's just not the sort of life I want for myself.

 

The bottom line is use what works for you and what makes you happy. If what you've been doing makes you happy then by all means continue. However, if you would like to publish one day, and are concerned about your first publication rights (and the all too many all to often vague interpretations of what those are), it might be worth looking into a place like writing.com.

 

.

 

Exactly!

 

We all have our own personal goals and must choose the right (ethical and moral) ways to achieve those goals. I very much hope that you achieve your goal of having your work published.

 

Kit

 

[kitten]

Okay, I was on the Authonomy site for about ten days. Well, technically I'm still on because trying to deregister is like pulling teeth.

Anyway, for ten days I was reasonably active and had a good look around, and I thought that I'd share my conclusions.

 

Apologies for such a long post, but hopefully it will help people to decide if they want to spend time uploading their novels to the Authonomy site.

 

The main conclusion is that it's all about rankings - which in fact anyone could tell just by looking at the home page! Both the books and the reviewers have ranks. The exact methods of calculating ranks are not specified, but the general principles quickly become clear.

 

Book rank appears to depend mostly on reviewers supporting the book by putting it on their 'bookshelf' or 'watchlist'. Reviewer rank appears to depend on how many books they review and whether those books become high-ranking. Also, support from a high-ranking reviewer has a much greater influence on the rank of a book than the support of a low-ranking reviewer.

 

Reviewers almost never read more than the first one or two chapters before deciding on whether or not to support it. Most books, though they may be finished, are not completely uploaded because the authors hope for eventual publication and believe that if the whole book has ever been made available on the net then it is unlikely that a publisher will be interested in it. Thus, by concentrating on writing a great first chapter, an author can get a high rank for his/her book even though the writing in the rest of the book, even the basic plot, could be complete rubbish. Indeed, they may have actually written only part of the book.

 

Obviously, any system can be manipulated and abused. I feel that this particular system is not only very open to manipulation, but I've actually seen so many examples of it on Authonomy that I assume that it is the 'norm' on that site.

 

Now, it might be argued that by requesting my readers to join Authonomy and support Tapping, I was trying to manipulate the system. There is no doubt an element of truth in that. However, my readers had read the whole story, genuinely liked it, I offered no inducement of any sort for them to vote, and their votes were essentially unweighted because they had no reviewer-ranking. Therefore, I consider that my manipulation, if such is was, to be reasonable and acceptable.

 

In contrast, on Authonomy reviewers read just the first chapter or two and the system is manipulated very much by the fact that support from one high ranking reviewer has the same effect on book rank as support from many (5-10?) low-ranking reviewers. A book on 5 'bookshelves' can be higher up the rankings than one on 15 bookshelves, and the support of just one high-ranking reviewer can make a book jump up from a ranking of about 600 (out of about 900) to a ranking of about 200.

 

Furthermore, the system is greatly distorted by the fact that reviewers often have their own books listed in the rankings. This, in my view, is probably the greatest single flaw of the system. You can suck up to a high-ranking reviewer by supporting his book and telling him you've done so, and then he will usually support yours in return. Thus I believe that it is no coincidence that many high-ranking reviewers also have high-ranking books.

 

This is not just my paranoid theory, but is made clear by this quite typical posting that I've seen in the site:

 

"Hi XXX, if you take a read of YYY I will run through ZZZ, and I keep my word. and who knows, when I get there I might even shelve it, it has been known to happen, sir."

 

This is an actual quote, but, to avoid any legal complications, I've replaced the author name with XXX and the book names with YYY and ZZZ. Such comments are very frequent, though not usually quite so blatant.

 

Obviously, the quality of the first couple of chapters of a book will influence the rank of a book, and if they are badly written or boring the book won't get far up the rankings. However, given two books of equally good quality, one might get into the top 100 but the other, with skillful toadying and other manipulations, can get into the top 10.

 

Frankly, I find such politicking, toadying, and manipulating are rather nauseating. Therefore, in its present form, Authonomy is not for me.

 

Kit

[Libby Drew]

Thank you, Kit, for taking the time to let us know about your experiences on Authonomy. You've made it abundantly clear to me, and quite objectively, I might add (thank you), that the site is not what I'm looking for. I'd joined when prompted, but never uploaded anything, which is for the best, as it turns out.

 

I find the 'author as reviewer' issue rather disturbing, actually.

 

Thanks again for the info.

[Graeme]

Thanks, Kit

 

I think a lot will also depend on how HarperCollins uses the site. The site itself is open to manipulation, but if the publisher takes that into account, it may still be worthwhile. However, for now, I'm going to leave it alone. My wife can wait a bit longer for her Ferrari....

[DEMO]

Thanks, Kit

 

I think a lot will also depend on how HarperCollins uses the site. The site itself is open to manipulation, but if the publisher takes that into account, it may still be worthwhile. However, for now, I'm going to leave it alone. My wife can wait a bit longer for her Ferrari....

 

Hey y'all:

 

Today I removed my story as well. I did it for a lot of reasons but the main one was the incredible time-suck that it is. I was spending as much time there as I had been running around The World Of Warcraft killing Horde.

 

And I ~LOVED~ the WoW.

 

I am so relieved about it too -- not having it looming over me.

 

I learned a lot, had a lot of great feedback, the title of my story changed, I read a lot of really good writing, I read just as much really bad writing, and above all else, I made some real in-roads into my neurotic insecurity about my writing.

 

So all in all a good thing. If I didn't have a job, a husband, or chores, I'd still be there .

 

Or playing WoW.

 

Dow.

Edited October 20, 2008 by DEMO

[kitten]

Thanks, Kit

 

I think a lot will also depend on how HarperCollins uses the site. The site itself is open to manipulation, but if the publisher takes that into account, it may still be worthwhile. However, for now, I'm going to leave it alone. My wife can wait a bit longer for her Ferrari....

 

You can bet that HC will use the site to its own advantage and that any advantage to authors will be purely coincidental.

 

The site could be made relatively worthwhile quickly and easily just by a couple of simple changes:

1) Don't allow authors with books on the list to review other books.

2) Don't have 'weighted' votes

 

I think the problem with (2) is pretty obvious, especially when it is combined with (1).

 

There would be no problem with (1) if ALL voting authors could be relied upon to be totally unbiased by the fact the books they are voting for are potential competition for their own book. HC say (though there is as yet no evidence of it) that books that reach the top of the rankings will be looked at by their junior editors and MAY, just possibly, be considered for publication. As you can guess, that makes competition for top rankings very intense, and some authors will be less scrupulous than others in the tactics they employ to rise up the ranks.

 

Even if most author-reviewers could be uninfluenced by the relative rankings of books, the less scrupulous author-reviewers would only gain additional benefit from the less-biased majority.

 

As it stands, the whole thing can be successfully manipulated by anyone with an instinctive or learned knowledge of game theory. e.g. A. make sure other authors vote for you if you vote for them. B. form 'alliances' with lots of people and get them to vote for you in exchange for your vote - that way you will get lots of votes from all of them but each of them will only get one vote from you.

 

My observation of the working of the site show the use of both A and B are often used, sometimes subtley and sometimes quite blatantly.

 

Those author-reviewers who can spend a lot of time on the site employing A and B will push their books much higher in the rankings than superior books by authors who are too scrupulous (or who can't spend enough time on the site) to employ those tactics.

 

Kit