🚀 go-pugleaf

The only filter CROW provides to the submissions it receives (if I
understand the ad correctly) is the ability of the author to make a
payment.  Why does making a payment to a third party make someone's work
more interesting to editors?

If CROW provided an agent-like first filter, so that editors would grow to
expect a higher quality of submissions from CROW than from the slush pile, 
I could believe a higher percentage of editor interest in CROW submitted
work.  Otherwise, CROW simply represents the work of portion of the
population that pays for something most people feel is a scam.  

Maybe these people somehow serve the market better?

Not.


Joe








> In article <1993Jun4.205246.28845@netwise.com>, hilary@netwise.com (Hilary
> Lane) wrote:
> > I happen to know the guy who started CROW, and can tell you it's no
> > scam. I've read the newsletters and have seen some book reviews he
> > and his reviewers have done. If you think it's a scam, why don't you
> > call him and talk with him? I'm sure he'd be happy to give you some
> > references. Before you start flaming, check out the facts.
> > 
> > In addition, if the reviewers that only charge a spaghetti dinner to
> > put aspiring authors not only in touch with genuine publishers but provide
> > substantive reviews of the work, then they're really getting underpaid for
> > their efforts. Would you care to let us know where to get in touch with
> > these critique groups and what kind of results the authors get?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Hilary Lane (hilary@netwise.com)
> > Netwise, Inc.
> > 2477 55th Street
> > Boulder, Colorado 80301
>