I am composing my conclusion chapter for my new book "The Karaite."
This is not even a rough rough draft, I need to do some extensive revisions, but I finished the basic structure,
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Then why are you posting in the atheist only section of these forums?
Also for constructive criticism:
Fixed, it's in debate room now
1. What random capitalization? some words were edited from ones where you should capitalize, I haven't grammatically corrected it yet.
2. Again, this is a rough draft, I was only trying to write down the basic ideas, I haven't edited or revised yet.
3. Where?
4. I put double citations because I intend to put sources as foot notes later on, after editing and thorough revisions.
Stop writing it is the best suggestion that I can think of.
No, that's a terrible suggestion, a better one is to drastically revise my writing. This is only a rough draft of a rough draft
Everyone has a book in them, but usually, it isn't very good. Given the fact that we have experienced your writing for too long, it is a good guess that your "book" will be lacking. To write a book one needs integrity, a quality that all of your post lack.
I have written several books. My experience has shown me tat you can't leave most of the editing to someone else. You must fact check everything you write. (unless are Bill O'Reilly and you are writing pure propaganda).
I can only go on what you have done since you've been here. You have no real conviction other than to ignore facts. You make a claim that comes from where, nobody knows. You are prone to impulse opinion statements, wild generalizations. You can't compose a book with that tactic and expect it to be respected.
So I suggest that you just not waste your time to write it because it surely will be a waste of time for anyone to read it.
Now journaling is therapeutic so try that. There is no need to subject people to your particular nonsense by publishing. It's bad enough that you impose your bipolar pathology on this forum.
You said that you were done and were leaving, yet you are still here.....see what I mean about integrity?
Actually, when I write in real time, or in this case where I receive many responses in a shot period, I don't have time to fact check, so I end up making factual or logical errors. This the reason I do a lot better on debate.org than on atheist republic.com, because I have time to fact check and carefully read over my content. Though when dealing with a short response or a stupid argument I don't bother.
I actually win most of my debates, and I get better over time. In addition to this, every author I know of said that their first book was an embarrassment. But practice makes perfect, and I got a hold of a professional editor.
You go on with your bad self! I had a poem published. Early "90s. I now think that poem was terrible. But I am proud that some one thought it was good enough to print .
@HT
Poor excuse at best. Your post is poorly written and not thought out.
You said "Actually, when I write in real time, or in this case where I receive many responses in a shot period, I don't have time to fact check, so I end up making factual or logical errors."
Responding in real time should only account for grammatical errors, not factual errors.
As far as first books go, J.D. Salinger's first book was published just as he submitted it. Not one punctuation was changed. In fact most first novels are changed very little. J.K. Rowlings first publication was also published with no changes.
Most editing is done because the author writes in the vernacular and has trouble maintaining the first person presentation.
What I have read of your post are are impulse emotional errors with a huge amount of grammatical and factual errors.
You want something to be true when in fact it isn't, but you post your response anyway. When you are called out on it, you go into excuses and justifications. This is a typical tactic by conservative propagandist.
Take Bill O'Reilly's book about the assassination of JFK. He said that he was there in Parkland hospital when it happened. Fact checking proved he was in Miami and was 11 years old at the time. He wanted it to be true, that he was first on the scene, but it was a complete and utter fabrication.
Take your blaming Kennedy for the Vietnam War. The fact is that Eisenhower involved the US in that war, but you wanted to blame a Democrat, so you ignored the facts.
I put it to you that you lack INTEGRITY. I don't think that you "win most of your debates". In your mind you do, but I doubt very much that that is the case. I doubt that you even conform to a debate format. I bet you rant and continue to rant, making inane untrue points and just think that you have won as you do on this forum.
Then there is the fact that you are confused. You don't and cannot have a REAL position but you lack CONVICTION. You aren't really sure who or what you are. You're a christian, you're not a christian, you are some sort of weird christian, even to the fact that you claim historical figures are what your latest fad status is. It's all a jumble of confused self-identity.
Before for you actually write a book, you should settle on who you really are.
I think that you are just wanting to be famous. I think that you are desperately searching for who you are and that you become whatever whim pops in your head or in front of you.
Cowboy, psychologist, hero, scientist, political expert, conservative icon, now you want to be a writer.
" I got a hold of a professional editor." This proves to me your childishness. It was a kneejerk response to one of my post about writing. I know the process of getting something published. There are several ways and methods. Self-publishing, going through a publishing house, submitting a manuscript an being accepted, getting an agent...etc! Just getting a professional editor isn't even close to the first step. Take Steven King. He was rejected more than 100 times before anyone accepted his submission.
No, you just can't be a famous writer overnight. To think so is childish. It takes hard work, research, dedication, thought. You want to skip all that, because as I said before, you want to be famous.
Most publication are authored by people already famous. Publishers know that they can make a profit off of the name rather than the work. Hence Blake Shelton has a children's book out. He wasn't published because the book is any good, he was published because his is already famous and is currently in the public eye. His book may be good, or may not be it doesn't matter, it will sell because he is already famous.
So these are the reasons I have reservations about your "book."
Lack of integrity
Lack of honesty
Lack of commitment
Lack of actually knowing who you are
Lack of hard work
Tendency of irrational kneejerk reactions
Lack of even knowing the process
Motivated by the idea of fame (not really having anything to say)
Submitting statements as fact when they are no more than wishful thinking, then making excuses and justifications after the fact when exposed to be false
Having a skewed vision of yourself (trying to be something that you cannot be)
These are the reasons. You may take them as insults. If you do, you're just fooling yourself.
So you see when I posted a response that was short about you writing your book that read "just don't write it", I didn't do so lightly. I have real reasons for saying so.
When you post things like "Hillary Clinton is a felon", should anyone take you seriously? No!
I said she committed a felony, which she did, lying under oath is a felony, and it would be on her record had she been prosecuted.
I just slapped together random ideas in this post so I would know what to go over, this isn't even the roughest of drafts! But we shall see, if I work at it I can bring my book up to par.
In regards to the Vietnam war. I saw on a documentary, that the Vietnam war started after a US ship we attacked during the Kennedy administration, perhaps a misunderstanding, but I didn't just make up some lie and pretend as if it were fact. It's called Hanlons Razor, look it up.
Holy SHIT you are ALL fucked up!
Hillary has NEVER committed a felony. Just because you WANT to believe she lied under oath doesn't make it true!
NAM: Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Happened Aug. 2nd, 1964. JFK was dead. See how off you are? It's mind boggling how you make wild claims that are simply not true! Hanlon's Razor doesn't apply here.
The fact is that YOU thought the Vietnam War was started by JFK. Now you are making excuses claiming that you saw a documentary that YOU claim US ship attacked something ( can't really tell what you were saying as the grammar is so bad).
The TRUTH,....THE FACTS...., The USS Maddox was in international waters off the coast of North Vietnam on August 2nd, 1964, when it was attacked by North Vietnam torpedo boats. Days later the US responded by escalating US involvement and sending thousands of troops to South Vietnam.
Eisenhower got us into Vietnam, Kennedy was dead by August 2, 1964. The N. Vietnamese attacked the US in the Gulf of Tolkin. Nixon lost the war.
You got everything wrong....everything. And you want to write a book? Are you kidding me?
Also, religion isn't my stronghold, that's economics, see my posts here:
http://commonsenseeconomics2.blogspot.com/
"That's not writing, that's typing," Truman Capote.