... like a good little NeoPoetian. If we're going to use this thread to discuss and hopefully implement changes in NeoPoet's format, we must have a means by which to state unequivocally that one does NOT think an idea is good.
As Jess mentioned concerning an option to prevent revisions from clogging the stream (we MUST allow revisions... it is our life blood), we need to be able to "vote" to say no to something rather than having our "no's" get lost in the comments inside.
wesley

It does my heart good to "hear" you feeling so much better.
"Please do not critique..." has to go. Agreed.
I think Beau has a good thought on the revision thing. Give the poet the opportunity to opt out of heading to the front of the Stream when they feel a tiny revision is too trivial to move them. But revisions MUST move the poem. It is the whole point of what we're doing- taking our drafts, posting them, getting input, rewriting and posting again for another round. This is likely a moot question anyway, for I don't think we have enough modest egos to make it worth the software change. Most of NeoPoet's population are searching for ways to move their poem up one more notch. And that's as it should be.
wesley

Thanks all who voted to support this

Hello Neopoets,

Imo, a heading for revisions that have been implemented because of critiques should be acknowledged. That is the raison d'être for Neo, no? Then it would be addressing the effectiveness of critique (or lack thereof).

~Anna

The revisions do not tell you if the revisions were done because critiques were made and accepted.

It would be nice to know when a revision/rewrite was posted if it was a result of the *nexus* of Neopoet...critiquing to improve poetry.

Think about it. Some poems are revised and reposted without any previous commentary. And the ones that are revised with the commentary...well do you have time to read the poem, look at the revisions and read the commentary, Jess?

~A