Are these really errors?
Posted: 20 May 2025, 15:39
<<
Editor Comments:
List of Errors—Corrections are in [brackets]
1. More like he was a prisoner of his flaws.
Correction: [It’s more] like he was a prisoner of his flaws.
2. No dialogues.
Correction: [There are no] dialogues.
3. Just raw storytelling that is immersive, and I loved it.
Correction: [It’s just] raw storytelling that is immersive, and I loved it.
4. In under fifty pages, the story pulled me so deep into its world I almost forgot I was not a part of Jap’s story.
Correction: In under fifty pages, the story pulled me so deep into its world [that] I almost forgot I was not a part of Jap’s story. >>
Someone please tell me, because I'm genuinely curious if these can be considered errors. The exact corrections of the editor also have a high possibility of plagiarizing my review as AI-generated because of how formulaic it sounds. Are stylistic choices not allowed in writing here? Why do these editors get so offended these days by the mere sight of informal/conversational tone? The requirement is only good grammar and no typos, right? Also, the fourth sentence got my review rejected, quoting the guideline breach of mentioning page count. I'm aware of that guideline, which also allows special cases of denoting page count if deemed worthy of the mention. I'm quite dumbfounded.
And all these on a review that was scored 100 by another editor, where this editor was pleased enough to give only 15. I humbly accept I deserve neither of those. And this is not the first time that I am encountering such a mountainous difference between two scores. I currently have four of my scorecards undergoing discrepancy issues because of subjective editors like this. I have to say, the diversity of the types of editors gets more interesting every day. I contacted support, but they too can handle only so much. I feel so guilty for venting this out to my support representatives. Do any of you have problems like these? I see on the forum it pushes people to give up and quit. It is really disheartening.
Editor Comments:
List of Errors—Corrections are in [brackets]
1. More like he was a prisoner of his flaws.
Correction: [It’s more] like he was a prisoner of his flaws.
2. No dialogues.
Correction: [There are no] dialogues.
3. Just raw storytelling that is immersive, and I loved it.
Correction: [It’s just] raw storytelling that is immersive, and I loved it.
4. In under fifty pages, the story pulled me so deep into its world I almost forgot I was not a part of Jap’s story.
Correction: In under fifty pages, the story pulled me so deep into its world [that] I almost forgot I was not a part of Jap’s story. >>
Someone please tell me, because I'm genuinely curious if these can be considered errors. The exact corrections of the editor also have a high possibility of plagiarizing my review as AI-generated because of how formulaic it sounds. Are stylistic choices not allowed in writing here? Why do these editors get so offended these days by the mere sight of informal/conversational tone? The requirement is only good grammar and no typos, right? Also, the fourth sentence got my review rejected, quoting the guideline breach of mentioning page count. I'm aware of that guideline, which also allows special cases of denoting page count if deemed worthy of the mention. I'm quite dumbfounded.
And all these on a review that was scored 100 by another editor, where this editor was pleased enough to give only 15. I humbly accept I deserve neither of those. And this is not the first time that I am encountering such a mountainous difference between two scores. I currently have four of my scorecards undergoing discrepancy issues because of subjective editors like this. I have to say, the diversity of the types of editors gets more interesting every day. I contacted support, but they too can handle only so much. I feel so guilty for venting this out to my support representatives. Do any of you have problems like these? I see on the forum it pushes people to give up and quit. It is really disheartening.