Thank you, don’t come again

Well, that didn't take long:

Critique (Scale 1-10*)

Fairly typical, as I understand it. Not a full sheet of
paper, which is environmentally correct, but a mere bookmark, which is
a cruel irony. But a decent copy on a decent sheet of paper, clearly
not Xeroxed into oblivion.
Score: 3

The guy clearly goes for kindly; "not quite intriguing enough"
is a soft blow. Basically: "You're not going to break any mirrors with
that face, but you ain't no beauty queen." Then again, "I have given it
my most careful attention" seems to contradict the "I've only had it
two weeks." A point off for being in the writing biz and using "thru" in a piece of business correspondence.
Score: 6

Sent approx. 4/16, received 5/1. Good turnaround in a
business that usually insists on 6-8 weeks minimum, so that offsets the
last bitch and moan from the "wording" segment.
Score: 8

Average Score:

Eh. Look, if I'd hit it out of the ballpark on the first query, I'd be
more full of myself than makes sense. That said, a homer on the first
pitch would have been sweet.

The collection begins.

*1 being a fart in the envelope, 10 being not a rejection at all but a fawning need to see more and more and more


  1. Amanda on 5/09/07 at 1:38 am

    [this is good] hey, thanks for posting this. it’s not bad for a rejection. could be much worse, eh? 😉 keep on going.

  2. Armchair News on 5/09/07 at 8:46 am

    Thanks, Amanda! Definitely could be worse.