I am hoping to find in WS an ambitious writer/blogger who might wish to undertake a new and wonderful project

As I have mentioned before it's increasingly difficult to peddle one's works. As the veteran AWAD’er will no doubt agree, I myself am no latter-day Hemingway; but if he were alive today he would have a new reason to commit suicide

Although it was never easy, the process today is daunting. With the old kind I remember from my youth, you simply send a MS and if they liked it they published it and you got paid for it by the word or in the case of a book, you got royalties. But today it seems impossible to do it the old way apparently because the traditional publishers are so inundated. Since word processing makes it an estimated 25 times easier to compose and so for that reason there are 25 times as many writers, within a given period each one gets probably 625 times as many MS's on speculation

There are a daunting number of online sites where you might get published (Googing “online-publisher” will get you the better part of one million hits) but which are also devoid of any sort of compensation. Though a recent development is the “free” site where you might get a pittance for your article or book—Helium.com and lulu.com respectively come to mind--they all seem excessively complex. On the first page of any such site there are ten links and each link gets you a page with ten more links ad infinitum whereupon you eventually just give up. After much tribulation I had nonetheless successfully joined Helium, hoping I might submit an article but continuing links to more new requirements finally discouraged me

To further set hurdles, as late as 2003 most legitimate publishers astoundingly wouldn't accept a digital MS but required you snailmail a printed copy, presumably with return postage. If Ayn Rand were rejected by 12 publishers before she found one willing to publish her first major novel (The Fountainhad), today she might still be unsuccessful after 625x12 = 7500 tries and about $30,000 in postage

So there is in fact, a new kind of publisher predominant who will laugh if you suggest they pay you and instead, if you want to get your work in print you pay them. Then they might require additional payments if you want them to find a market for it but even then if it doesn’t prove successful you of course don’t get a penny from anybody. But you did get to choose its font and page size and the appearance of the cover

Thus in the digital world where sending manned rockets to the moon got so easy we quit doing it 40 years ago, it seems to me there ought to be an easier way for the aspiring author to find a suitable market. So somebody who knows how to do these things should start a new site. It would be easy to use and would work as follows:

The hopeful user would submit an email or a post containing boilerplate such as his name and address, the sort of pub for which it’s intended, and identify means of remuneration such as Pay Pal, etc. He would simply include his MS—a magazine article or book, for instance--as an attachment. That’s all he would be required to do

Admittedly the software for this new site I propose would be elaborate, demanding, and difficult in its algorithm because for instance it would have to be familiar with the requirements of thousands of publishers and therefore it might take months or years for even a highly competent crew of Administrators to establish. But it would be a boon to millions of amateur, fledgling, or even erstwhile writer such as I and possibly the professional who can’t spend a lifetime attempting to find a market for each composition, discourse, or document

After a quick scan if Admin of this new sight considered the MS at all promising, it would set into motion software which submits the MS (in digital form of course) to pubs —mags or booksellers—considered compatible. If not of course the author would soon get a rejection notice. Given even an outside chance, however, he might get the attention that would otherwise require him ten years of sweat and tears to perform alone; while eventually the Admin of this new site might realize a few cents’ profit by a modest cut from any successful pub or even in the case for instance of a best-seller, a substantial return

Johnathon Clifford coined the term vanity press back in '59. He has a site (link).

Not all 'self-publishing' need to be 'vanity-publishing'.
It's real nice and easy now to make a good memorial book for someone you feel deserves to be visible and remembered on pages.
And for some poets and musicians self- publishing and releasing
a record or CD on personal authority meant the start of true career. (But you need tot start a bit early with this, oh, and have some real potential)

zm thank you for that link; yes, "vanity" was the adjective lurking in the back of my mind

Bran: " ...oh, and have some real potential)" Yes, as well as just a fortune in savings you can afford to fritter away

publishing industries(especially music?) are in the middle of a paradigm shift, with production and delivery being so different than just a few years ago. it is going to be very interesting to see where things will settle.

eta thank you for that observation and indeed it will. Meanwhile are there any other participants with some writing background who might agree with my suggestions or who have found an expedient means to market your works

Not all 'self-publishing' need to be 'vanity-publishing'.

This is true. I have self-published a book and have just about broken even on the endeavor. I also know of some self-published books that became publisher published after the fact: e.g., Robert Hall's Leave Your Language Alone! which was republished as Linguistics and Your Language. The last time, Dale complained about being the world's most unpublished author, I suggested the self=publication route and sent him some links, especially to POD (print on demand). He was not interested in spending his own money, but was looking for outside investors, either of the traditional publishing house kind or as in this current thread.

in the middle of a paradigm shift

Indeed, I heard yesterday on the radio that Coldplay's album, Viva la Vida, had sold as 2M CDs and in 500K paid downloads. Pretty good for a medium that has been heralded as the end of music, books, movies, et al. It would be interesting to see the breakdown in the cost of manufacturing, inventory, shipping, selling, etc., physical CDs, as opposed to downloading bits.

eta, zm: What's happening, are we the only participants remaining at this site

well, we're probably the only ones that care much about this sort of thing!

...or apparently about any sort of thing

the board is cyclical, and has always had its fast and slow times.

currently, I think many folks are evincing their emacity.

-joe (giving expression to my epeolatry) friday

Oh No: you are not alone. I just don't have a lot to contribute.
But I do wish you the best of Luck. I have tried to get 3 plays and one book printed in the past, with no luck. So I shall follow your progress should you decide to share it with us.
Again best of luck !

you were saying?

;¬ )

Speaking of emacity, I couldn't find any etymology for the word. Judging from the meaning it doesn't seem all that related to emaciate, but one can't help but think that it should be. Any information on its etymology?

well, here's what the wwftd master had to say this morning:

the worthless word for the day is: emacity

[fr. L. emacitas, a desire to buy] /ee MAS i tee/
rare a fondness for buying things


and it seems that emaciate is from emaciare, an entirely nother root.

Hmm, comparing napples and noranges with a noun and a verb.

Luke, why thank you, such encouragement is a rare and valuable commodity in this hotbed of mutual recrimination and I am dlehileman@verizon.net

dalehileman:
thanks for the thanks. Go for it man. Keep us informe[/s]

Uh...y'all--Dale and Luke--I don't know much about vandalism, but I think there's a reason Anu stopped using that "at" sign in the newsletter, etc. Isn't that one of the things that people set up their bots, spiders, or whatever to look for? I fear y'all're askin' to be inundated with spam.

Good advice. Won't do it again. Probably will get lots of spam now, sorry. Did not know it was a 'forbidden' in the forum. I'd erase it now if I could. Is there away, I guess I will just have to live with it.

PS>
Can such info be listed in the private message section should one choose? (I presume that is above under "my stuff" ?

Surprisingly enough Jackie I get very little Spam in spite of broadcasting dalehileman@verizon.net far and wide

you should have an "Edit" button on the lower left part of the post?

etaoin:
I have the edit button located. (I am very new to computer use
and appreciate the help). I have tried to edit, but am getting no where> I struck out the email address, but that seems to be all I can do. Any suggestions?

you can't just select it and delete it? strange. there may be some time limit involved, but I wouldn't think we were past that. maybe.

hmm.

eta, it's been my experience that with raw rookies you can't assume they'll grasp what terms like 'select' and 'delete' mean...
-ron o.

I'm sorry, tsuwm. As a 'raw rookie" I am only trying to learn.
When I go back to my original posting, there is no select or delete anywhere on the screen. I do need the help.

select and delete are common editing terms. if you compare any of your posts with any other post you'll note that you have an edit button on yours. but you've discovered that. when you click the edit button, you get your post back in an edit box. by placing the flashing cursor anywhere in the edit box with your mouse (click the left mouse button to fix the insertion point) you can then insert additional text at that point, or you can delete text at that point (using the delete or backspace keys).

you can also use the mouse to select a whole string of text. this is done by holding down the left mouse button while dragging it (the mouse, that is) across the text you want to highlite (select). think of using a yellow marker in a book. when you have some text selected in this manner, you can type to replace it or just use the delete key to remove it.

-joe (this makes more sense in a classroom setting) friday

(I am very new to computer use and appreciate the help)

Luke I commiserate and feel much the same way after 18 years using Microsoft. When I have learned Mac as well as Bill I will be 106

Besides you and me and tsu and eta, where is everyone

It's been weeks now...

... coming from someone who didn't post between Aug 23 and Nov 9. (^_^)

TSUWM:
thanks for your help. I was beginning to assume I could not make a change in an entry once posted in the forum. But it worked.

dalehileman:
Myridon entered the discussion. Nice.
Thanks dale. I'll be 106 when I master Microsoft.
Appreciate your comment.

more about 'select'...
Click and drag your mouse across some text in any post; e.g., the text "Click and drag your mouse" in this very post. Your chosen text should now be selected. Now go up to the very top of your browser window and click the Edit menu. You should see the Copy function listed in that menu. You could click on that, but instead note that it indicates that Ctrl+C is listed next to it (this is the keyboard shortcut for the copy function). So, with your selected text still highlited, press the Ctrl and 'c' keys simultaneously. Nothing obvious happens, but you will have 'copied' the selected text onto the Windows clipboard. Now 'reply' to this post -- back in the Edit menu, note that the Paste command lists a Ctrl+V shortcut. While in the edit box (click inside the box if you don't have the flashing insertion point there), press the Ctrl and 'v' keys simultaneously. Your selected text should be 'pasted' from the clipboard into the edit box.

if so, you have just mastered the 'copy and paste' function!
this is a really good thing to master, as it will work within virtually every Windows application and (even better) *between* applications; so that you can for instance select and copy some text in a browser window and paste it into an email!!

Note: Do not try to press both keys at precisely the same time. You run a 50/50 chance if hitting the "c" key first and this will not accomplish what you want. Press the Ctrl key and hold it down while you then press the "c" key. Treat the Ctrl-key as a shift key.

Myr I am deeply impressed by your diligence

Luke what a fine fellow you seem in this maelstrom of of diabolical interchange

tsuwm, I personally think it's less confusing to just click on the words Copy, and Paste, up in the Edit menu; it took a personal visit from Capital Kiwi for me to even know the Ctrl+ functions existed. I had seen the notations up there, but didn't take in that it might mean anything.

Luke, Faldage had a good cautionary note--be sure to hold down the Ctrl button before pressing the c (for copy) or v (for paste).

I will add something, too: when you Copy something, it does not disappear from your screen (as opposed to what happens when you Cut)--a copy goes to be stored on a place in the innards of your computer called, as tsuwm said, the clipboard. But it will only stay on/in the clipboard until you Copy or Cut the next thing. Let's say you have made a long post here, and you want to share part of it with somebody via an e-mail. If you highlight paragraph one and hit Copy, and then highlight paragraph three and hit Copy, and only then go to your letter and hit Paste, only paragraph three will get there: you needed to go to your letter and hit Paste as soon as you Copied para. one, then go back and picked up para. three.

Also--you, or anyone, can practice here all you want (though you can also practice in an e-mail to yourself, etc.): just pretend you're making a post (that is, hit the Reply button), then Preview anything you've experimented with. Nothing will get posted unless you click on the Submit button. Just either hit the Back arrow, close the window, or whatever.

Jackie thank you for that rundown, you seem very literate, and in that connection I wonder whether you might have also some insights to share regarding the proposition of my original post

Boy, I sure fooled you, then! :-) Thanks, though! And no, I have no ideas on that other than I too wish things worked that way.

Jackie et al: Incidentally when I posted the question at another site I got much the same response, namely that that there's no easy way: In spite of rockets to the moon getting so trivial we quit doing it 40 years ago and the rise of the Internet where you can correspond with everyone simultaneously, the only way to peddle your book is the way it was done 600 years ago

(..., movable type) Gutenberg

Dale:
600 years ago with Gutenberg
6000 years ago in cuneiform on stone.
yuk,yuk

6000 years ago in cuneiform on stone

5K years BP is pushing it, and though there are examples of a semi-alphabetic cuneiform being carved into stone (some Old Persian inscriptions of Darius, ca. 6th century BCE), it was developed for writing on clay tablets. Many tablets have been discovered because the buildings in which they were stored were burned during wartime and the tablets were fired into clay bricks.

Just give you the whole page. They are so wonderful, those clay tablets I saw this summer with lots of other Mesopotamian miracles and treasures in the great BABYLON exhibtion.

tablets

They are so wonderful, those clay tablets

And, deceptively heavy, they are. On a field trip for an archeology class I took way back when, we visited a museum where they let us handle some Babylonian clay tablets. They are quite dense and the writing was tiny and difficult to make out. (The photos one sees are usually very well lighted.)

5K years BP is pushing it.

I was thinking of Fred Flintstone. Sorry.