Do you think this might come down to ePubbed authors seeing something (intentions) there that the rest of us don’t? Clearly you (and many others) feel that RWA was out to get the ePubs, that there was some kind of agenda to boot ePublishers and ePubed authors, but from what the board said, what their clarified intent was, and what the end result is, I just don’t see it. Maybe I’m more gullible than most, but I believe the board when they said that wasn’t their intent.

Perhaps it wasn’t the Board’s intent. I’m perfectly willing to accept that. Unfortunately, I’m not the only one who was at the AGM when the president — and I hold her solely responsible, not the Board at large — told us that because our advances weren’t high enough, we hadn’t written a book.

You can see where e-published authors might get a little tetchy.

I’d rather do something proactive and work to change the system from the inside, but that’s me . . .

And that’s why I’m still a member…of the Loyal Opposition. It’s nothing personal when I say that I don’t like some of RWAs work. I want RWA to succeed in their mission:

Romance Writers of America is dedicated to advancing the professional interests of career-focused romance writers through networking and advocacy.

So I’m willing to stick with them until they find a way to accept that as an e-published author, I’m a professional, career-focused romance writer, too.

Peace out-
Stef

Stef

In most cases, that’s how change works best, from within

I think the RWA has it’s good/great points but it’s not everything for everyone. There are things I would like to do, chapter wise and have ideas of one I would like to start (unless someone-else beats me to it before I can rejoin).

Candy, one thing I figured out early on is that I can’t let others ‘define’ what I am. I started out in epublishing and I still put out books with my epubs. I’ve had to face slights from a few fronts, but not all the members are like that. Most of the chapters are wonderful and welcome epublished authors as easily as they do print pubbed.

That’s good advice. I’m still “new” and learning and that’s a lesson that I’m glad I learned. I’ve experienced a mix of both while in RWA – about 60/40 or 65/35 maybe as a best estimate with the higher number being more positive. And then there’s the ones whose just completely disregarded me, those I ignore.

I think that’s a shame if some are saying that to you. There are multitudes of serious writers who don’t belong to any organization. The organization doesn’t make them serious writers. Writing does.

My sentiments exactly. I’ve learned or am learning to let my writing speak for itself. But again, I balk at the idea that I “have to” do anything, which is why I resisted the re-join (finances not withstanding). And the attitude surprised me and put me on the defensive I guess. But the ones I’ve met in the blogosphere and on-line world have (mostly) been great. And support amazing.

It’s why I write to reach people, to maybe help, to show someone like me can make a change in their life for the positive and so girls who grew up like me who devoured romance books, any books they could get their hands on would see similar characters reflected back at them (which was sadly missing while I grew up). It’s the only thing I’ve ever wanted to be – a pubbed author. And I am, whether it’s “recognized” by anyone else. I put the time and effort into creating my novellas. And have the product to show for it.

It’s a great feeling.

I think there is a point where it doesn’t matter if this multi-year long pattern of behavior is based on not liking e-,small press,non-hereosexual,erotic etc types of romance, or just neither knowing nor caring about them (which is rather more likely).

What does it serve to make it personal? You don’t know me from Adam, have no idea of what I like and don’t like, or what my motivation was in voting yes to the changes in how members qualify to be in RWA’s Published Author’s Network. You also have no clue what I’ve done in the past year in an effort to educate myself so that I can help other writers learn more about e-publishing, to help them make more informed decisions. You don’t know mine or my family’s sexual leanings. In short, you know nothing at all about me as a human being.

You’re entitled to your opinion, but I take offense to you proclaiming in a public venue that I don’t like certain subgenres of romance, certain methods of publishing books, or that I choose not to know about them.

I’d rather do something proactive and work to change the system from the inside, but that’s me . . .

In most cases, that’s how change works best, from within.

The feeling of being disdained and ignored is not strikingly different from the feeling of being actively disliked, for me anyway.

The whole world of ePubs is still in its infancy, and it’s going to take time for the world (and RWA) to adapt and figure out just how to incorporate this new aspect of publishing into a system that simply isn’t set up to mesh with it. The way I see it, you can either be part of the solution, or you can grouse in the corner about being excluded. I’d rather do something proactive and work to change the system from the inside, but that’s me . . .

I’ll repeat: ONE former president’s agenda–and imo–bias.

ONE person. Not a pattern of behavior.

Poorly worded–no question. Quickly clarified.

I don’t think anyone was silly for interpreting the initial statement the way most did. But I also think it was refined very fast.

I think it’s fair to call somebody on a mistake–and fair to credit them when that mistake is rectified.