It's my favourite, so don't discuss with me!

For a few days, I've had this craving for cake. Today, while I was cycling through the city, I tried to find a cafe that looked promising. I knew what I was after, but none of the cafes delivered. Mind you, I didn't really look inside, but from the outside it all looked like your typical muffins.
Now I'm not really a big cake eater, sponge cakes, that is; I'm a cream cake connoisseur. Black Forest Cake to be precise. I love the mixture of cherries, cream, chocolate sponge and booze. Each mouthful is an explosion of flavours and textures--pure heaven.

My most favourite treat

Just thinking about it makes my mouth water. However, since I was rather unlucky in my pursuit of a suitable cake, I gave up and cycled home. Upon arrival I had the genius idea to pop by the new ice cafe around the corner; it had opened just a month or so ago and while I've tried their (ridiculously overpriced) ice-cream, I didn't give the cakes a second look back then. The longing to sink my teeth into something soft and sweet drove me into the cafe and the girl behind the counter came to sell me their wares. Nothing took my fancy. Then I spotted it and thought my day is safe. A tiny label read: Black Forest Cake! I could feel my eyes lightning up, and I quickly scanned their display, but couldn't find the object of my desire. Huh?
I asked and she pointed at a cake I'd (mis)taken for a chocolate cake. It was flat and covered with cocoa--no chocolate, cherries or cream in sight. My initial reaction was: That's not a Black Forest Cake; which she didn't take too well. She assured me it was a Black Forest Cake. I insisted it wasn't. It ended with her wishing me a good day, with a sour smile on her face.
Seriously, these things do wind me up. If you're a cafe and don't know how a Black Forest Cake looks like, then don't sell it. And definitely don't try to argue with a German, whose absolute favourite cake is the one in question. And because I didn't get my fix of sweetness, I'm now baking my very first own cake. Coconut sponge cake, for that's probably all I can manage, being the disaster bakeress. Let's hope it won't come out as a brick. Pictures and recipe to follow if it doesn't. So far it looks good and smells even better.

And now to you, npower!

You see, I've been with your company for almost six years and, despite a few hiccups in the beginning, when you thought it's a good idea to increase my bills without letting me know and, more importantly, without any reason, but paying me back after I'd called you twice, it all ran quite smoothly. Even better: my bills became less and less, because I'm a considerate person who tries to save energy where she can. I even got a new gas meter, which I feared may increase the costs, (as I've been told by the friendly gas man) but it didn't. Lucky me.
Of course I was pretty pleased when my bills for gas and electricity got less and less. And that is because I don't own a telly or stereo or any other entertaining equipment. I also use energy saving light bulbs everywhere and only light and heat the room I'm in. Clever, innit?
Well, apart from the iguana, which requires heat. So in 2010 I got a large vivarium for the big boy, and with it, I got a 150W ceramic heat emitter, two 100W basking bulbs, and a heating mat, which all cost a lot of money. And in the winter I swapped the 150W heat emitter for 250W. But still, my bills became less. Mind you, I only used my laptop all day and one single energy saving bulb in the evening, plus the electric cooker. And I only heated the living room/bedroom and in the bathroom for short periods. (It was a studio flat). When it was really cold, I even had the heating on most of the day and often a few hours at night. It was a very old and cold building.
Nevertheless, I ended up paying £19 a month for both, gas and electricity. Surely, you can see that I was pretty happy about it. I knew my neighbours didn't pay much either. Why? Because I asked them.

Okay, in January 2012, I moved into a 1-bedroom flat. Which was all pretty exciting and wonderful, but maybe you could explain to me why I have to pay £106 per month now! Because I really don't understand. I have the same equipment, same iguana, same light and heating bulbs, and I've not changed my behaviour: I still only light and heat (much less) the room I'm in, yet the costs increase. I'd like to know why.

When I called you and explained my situation, your staff kept babbling about the vivarium using most of the energy, which is logical, but it used the same energy beforehand, so that doesn't make sense, does it? I'm sure you will agree that if I have one lamp in one flat and carry the same lamp to another flat, it should use the same amount of energy, right? So I don't need your staff to tell me I should talk to your energy advice department, because I know my bills should be a little higher due to the vivarium. I wouldn't say anything if I had to pay a little more because the radiator is bigger than in my old flat, but how come that I'm paying that much of a difference? I mean between £19 and £106 is a large gap. Even with the credit I had, and I would have paid about £30 without it. It's still a huge difference. And no, I don't think my meters in the old place ran particularly slow, as you'd like argue.

Every time when I call you, you merrily tell me I have to pay even more because I dared to use some gas for having a shower, or even heating a little. And, as you can imagine, I'm not impressed. At all!

It's out in the open!

The educational rant, that is.

It's available on Amazon at the moment and for a special price. If you need a laugh, go and grab it. Unless you're one of the Indie authors who are on my rather large chopping board.

Amazon.co.uk 77p     Amazon.com 99c

Blurb:
Since I got my Kindle I have downloaded roughly 100 books—I'm a slow reader—which resulted in a deleting marathon.
Those who have been following my blog, know that I hold a Ph.D. in ranting. Be it about self-published authors and their behaviour in social media, or the mediocre to non-existent quality of self-published books. Not all of them, but certainly the ones I've deleted.
To help lift the overall quality, I decided to do what I do best: write a lengthy rant about my observations and experiences, followed by suggestions on how to make it better, and a few additional tips and tricks. Beware: it's not for the faint-hearted.
Whether you are a suffering reader or a self-published author, I hope you'll get a giggle and some useful advice, or maybe even both from this book.

If you'd like to get something off your chest: Rage against the Indie fan-/ememy-page 

Blog hangover: an aftermath of yesterday's post

As expected, my posting an excerpt of my current WIP, which addresses self-published authors who just can't be bothered to respect the craft of writing or their readers, has sparked an interesting discussion. Once the book is finished and on the market, it will become apparent who I'm targeting and why. Just to be clear here: I celebrate self-publishing and the way it opens door for authors and readers alike. Years ago, I had a friend who wrote down her experiences with her abusive husband; she couldn't talk about it to anyone, particularly not him, so she wrote a book, getting it out of her system. She was still young and needed to do that to eventually communicate with her family and her ex-husband. I don't know if she's ever published the book, but I thought it was very brave of her. I don't think she ever intended to make a big deal out of it and seek representation. I don't address people like her with my book. Self-publishing has always been perfect for that. But normally, they would get a few copies printed and hand them out, not go and sell them to the public.

This has changed, though, and I'm addressing those who think they have it in them, who think they're the next Amanda Hocking or John Locke; those who think writing is really easy and they just hack the words into their laptop and then go and promote the hell out of the pile of shite they've produced. Well, why don't you just sample, you may ask. The sample function of a book may give you an indication of the writing/grasp of grammar, but it won't give you an indication of how well plotted the book may be. And I've seen great first three chapter and then: downhill. By then you've wasted hours, or in my case: days, weeks even.

As Derek yesterday suggested: go back to buying books of the big six! Yes, that's actually what I've decided. I've got about 50 odd self-published books on my Kindle and will give all of them a try, but I'm definitely not adding more for the time being. Though I have downloaded one more yesterday; co-incidentally, the one I was attracted to was free. People will say if it's free you have nothing to lose. I disagree. How about time? Time is the one thing I can't get back. Apart from turning back the clock, that is, but that's a different matter.

However, one point left a sour taste in my mouth:  A few new visitors, names I hadn't seen before popped up and 'defended' the indie scene by coming in bulk, recommending each others' works. Which was quite a shame to discover. It reeks of scratch my back and I scratch yours, or we're from the same website and therefore must recommend each other. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for supporting each other if you read and love the books, but why not being open about it by saying: We're a collective of indie authors and maybe you could give one of us a try (which I'm doing as said above), I guarantee the books are well edited. That would have come across as more honest than a group of people blowing each others' horns. I'm sure it was unintentional, but it reeked somewhat fishy to me.
In general, I don't care much about recommendations. Why? Because taste is something you can't discuss. What you might love, I might hate. For as long as I can remember, I've been someone who went into a library (as a kid) and a bookshop later on, preferring to browse. I could spend hours there, choosing the right read. I never asked the shop assistant for help, I let my gut feeling decide, and to 99% I ended up with a read I either loved or at least enjoyed immensely. There's only one person whose recommendations I follow and that's from my friend Piddi. Every books she's given me has been a winner, and that's the only person I will listen to blindly.
Anyway, I'm glad to have made the acquaintance of a bunch of indie authors who take their 'job' seriously, particularly David, who seems to have a wicked sense of humour. (Loved your teen-voice post. Hilarious.)

Beware, self-publishers. A massive storm front is coming your way!

Since I got my Kindle I have downloaded roughly 100 books, which resulted in a deleting marathon

Thosewhohavebeenfollowingmyblog,knowthatIholdaPh.D.inranting.Beitaboutself-publishedauthorsandtheirbehaviourinsocialmedia,orthemediocretonon-existentqualityofself-publishedbooks.Tohelplifttheoverallquality,Itriedtowriteaself-editingmanual,butfailedmiserably.It'snotmyforte.IthendecidedtodowhatIdobest:writealengthyrantaboutmyobservations,myexperiences, include suggestions on how to make it better,andthrowinafewtipsandtricks;allofittongueincheek, of course.Beware:it'snotforthefaint-hearted.

This is an excerpt of how it will look/sound like. The self-editing help will be thrown in where appropriate. Remember it's a first draft and will be edited/proofread before it's published.

 

Self-publishing is great!

Every time I think I may have a day without an idiot-intervention, life decides I could do with one more. I'm on the Amazon forum, chatting away, discussing self-published books on a thread I've started because the ones I've read didn't convince me. I want to know how others feel about it. The opinions are, as expected, mixed, which is always a good basis for a healthy debate. I'm just posting a recent experience with a self-published book, explaining my reasons for not liking it, when a new post from a person, who's not participated yet, appears.

As a self-published author I must say it is great to finally be able to get my writing to the readers directly. After having been rejected by several agents I almost gave up, but then Kindle came along and I thought why not try it? I'm a bit unsure as I've never showed my writing to anyone but my grandmother, and she really liked it. I've published my book 'First Novel', and I wonder if you all can take a look and give me constructive feedback.

Huh? So you are telling me you had no feedback on your writing and went ahead with publishing despite that? I sigh deeply. It's not the first time that that happened; on a thread clearly for readers to exchange their opinions, self-published authors will come at least twice a week, telling us about their experiences and how great it is to be able to self-publish. While nobody denies the greatness of it, it's hardly the right place to report how it was for them. I've since then come to the conclusion that most self-published authors can't read to save their lives, or understand what they've read for that matter. Seriously? The title of that thread reads: Self-published books: pain or gain? Writers misread it continuously as: self-publishing books: pain or gain? And that's just the beginning; they don't even read the original posts, which clearly determines what the thread is about. No, they jump right in shouting about their books, hardly any of them gives an answer to my question: Have you read self-published books and what is your opinion on the quality?

I could go through the over 3500 posts to count how many authors actually misread it, but I seriously can't be arsed. Out of 201 participants, my guess is about 150 have misread the title. When I, or someone else, points out their mistake, most of them won't even see it as their only intention was to dump their book links and bugger off, never to be seen again. Or if they actually read our reply most of them get rather defensive. My favourite one: I've read plenty of traditionally published books that are rubbish!

Aha! And that gives you the excuse to publish rubbish, too. Is that what you're saying? No, is the reply, but there are plenty of great self-published book out there!

Okay, I ask, can you name one really great gem you've discovered?

The author then spares me an answer. My guess is they haven't read any self-published books but her own. Another wonderful argument they use is: self-published books are great because they can push the boundaries, authors are not restricted by any publishing house anymore. That freedom is priceless.

Right, let me get that straight, you think that all traditionally published authors' voices are muted? That publishers release only uninteresting, boring titles and never any edgy stuff?

Haha. Now you made me laugh. A few years ago I read James Frey's A Million Little Pieces and thought it was pretty out there: not only the subject matter, but also the style. It was raw; and it was written with minimal punctuation (no quotes in dialogue, which, by the way I didn't even notice back then). Twilight, no matter what you think of it, was pretty experimental with the sparkling vampire. Little Brown took the risk and the rest is history. And what about Trainspotting? So don't tell me that the big six or even the smaller reputable publisher don't publish edgy fiction, it's just not correct. I also would like to see one edgy example of self-published books that made it to the top. Go on, then, tell me one. Okay, 50 Shades Of Grey, but that's not really edgy. It's just erotica, and that has always sold well.

When I ask people to provide me with proof that self-publishing is the next big talent mill, I'll never get an answer. I doubt it's any more a talent mill than traditional publishing. There are talented authors in both publishing arms. Many self-publish because either they don't have a marketable enough book and got rejected, or they choose to go their own way. They normally won't make millions with it anyway, no matter how they publish it. The majority of readers don't want edgy, they want easy and familiar. John Locke, E.L. James, Amanda Hocking are quoted, but they're not really edgy; they are genre writers, exactly the 'easy and familiar' people want. Nothing wrong with that, but it's proof that only genre writers will make it big. You write for the right market, you're in it with a chance, so spare me your shite about edgy and new talent. I've yet to find one, to be honest. What I've read was mostly badly plotted, unedited stuff. I mean it. Some of it such utter drivel a 13-year-old school kid could have done better. Recently, I saw a post from a girl who had published her first offering. Of course never showed it to anyone, and why would she? Just use the paying public as beta readers, that'll do nicely. Not!

She left the house. She walked to the car. Then she opened the door and sat behind the wheel. She looked in the mirror to check her make up, then started the car and drove away.

I'm not kidding you, that's about the same style she wrote. What's worse is that a reader saw that 'plug' of hers and went to leave a review for the short piece, saying she was really impressed and that the author should be proud of herself. I almost fell off my chair. These are the kind of books readers are offered and I'm not surprised that so many people knock self-publishing. With no quality control readers have only one choice: skim through the floating rubbish until they find something readable. Those thoughtless authors are a disgrace for those of us who take our job—yes, it's a job—seriously. Believe it or not, but there are people who outline their stories with care, develop their characters so that they come alive, know a thing or two about showing instead of telling and, in general, have some acquainted skills to craft a good and entertaining book.

I've read books with holescraters in them, it was beyond belief. Not to forget the illogical behaviour of the main characters or story lines. I just wanted to slap the authors. Hard and repeatedly. Then I read books that were decent, but bored me stiff. Exactly that kind of books people claim traditional publishers would publish: same old, same old. They often are by seasoned authors who have been under contract and decided to go DIY, for they have the control over it and can break out of the in-house styles of their previous publishers. Do they do it? No. The books were well-edited, but frankly the stories didn't have anything interesting to them, no bite, no grip, nothing that wanted me to forget feeding the iguana, or myself.

Could you all take a look, please? No! Sod off!

You've guessed correctly. I have a full blown rant in me, and it demands its way out. So, fasten your seat belt and hold on to your wig, it'll get rough.
As a self-published author I'm frequenting fora on a regular basis. Often just to chat, more often though, to discuss. It can get heated, which is fine by me, as long as it stays factual. I will also hit people verbally over the head every now and again. Trust me, they deserve it. And it happened a lot more often lately as some people are seriously not one, but a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
I have lost count on how many new authors popped on one of my threads where we discuss self-published books, announcing they've just published their first book, and asking either me or all participants to take a look at it, then feed back to them. My favourite: Any constructive review would be great.
Excuse me? Are you telling me that you have not had anyone look at your book before publishing? Are you serious? I mean, really? Are you serious?
That explains a lot. Asking for feedback when the book is already published is so clever, even I'm impressed. Not! I wonder why people ask others to look at their offerings and tell them what they think. Is it really important to them? To be honest, I don't care at all. Go look at my book and tell me you think it's shite. Fine, if it makes you feel better. Of course a review is important, mainly for the potential buyer, but that's a different matter. Asking people for feedback after a glance at the 'look inside' feature is baffling to say the least. What do they need feedback for? Either the book is edited and polished or it's not. If it's not, then go and fix it. Before publishing! It worries me that amateurs, who can't even be bothered to use Google to find writers' sites and learn the craft before they even think of publishing, seem to take it as a given that readers are their guinea pigs. When have readers become beta readers by default?
I really don't need to take a look when it's a first time author, 99% of the cases are in dire need of an edit.
And it's a brave move to ask me, the one who initially started that thread stating that I'm not impressed with self-published books in general, what I think of their novel, because the answer will most possibly hurt. I don't have respect for people who don't work hard and gain skills before publishing. I'm very sorry if that sounds arrogant, but even the most talented person needs some practice. And after my deleting marathon, I'm not really keen on reading more dross. Thank you very much. Plus, I certainly don't have the time to read opening after opening, telling those hopeful souls the bad news. Most of them won't even go and hire an editor, so it's lost energy, or my sanity. Maybe even both in the worst case scenario.

Tip of the week: how to react to negative reviews

Yes, I know, it's been done to death and I thought that everyone got the message after the Howett incident, but I seem to be wrong. I recently read a blog post giving some advice that had me fuming. Massively. The self-published author, who had obviously been spoiled by positive reviews (I assume by his friends), started to receive negative ones saying the story is unbelievable, characters not likeable, etc. So what did he do? He thought to himself that writing an article about the 'how to' would be a great idea. Yes, I agree, it is, but only if the 'how to' contains the following: be professional about it and take it on the chin.

Of course he didn't do that. No. He advised to look up your favourite authors' books and feel comforted when reading all the 1-star-reviews. Whereas it doesn't do any harm, it's pointless, because it doesn't make your book better, does it?
I won't repeat all the points, but stress the two that made me want to slap him. Hard. Very hard.
1.) He advised to get your mates to downvote the negative reviews and
2.) to ask as many friends as possible, who are confident to write a 5-star-review and, yes, you guessed it, get them to post them.
I honestly couldn't believe my eyes. Not only is this particularly immature, but also highly frowned upon, and that rightly so.

Needless to say that it didn't take long until he got his wrists slapped by fellow authors and readers who weren't too impressed with such advice. Serious self-published authors have enough difficulties without those who pull such stunts. People like that want to play professional in the professional league, but are still in kindergarten.
Now, I'm not so much concerned about people being vocal about it, they'll be put in their places in no time, but I'm worried about those who just go ahead and do it. Fair play to this particular author, though, he has amended that post. If he's also altered his way of thinking, I don't know.

I'd keep it simple: if you receive a negative review, rise above it. Not everyone will love or like your book. If you receive more or them, all pointing out the same issue, stop huffing and puffing and instead get cracking, they may be onto something.
The only response a reviewer deserves is: Thank you for taking the time to read my book.

Stop messing with the system just because you can do it. You want to be taken seriously? Then act like it!

Rant over!

The curious encounter of Stella Deleuze

There are things I really love, like my new flavoured coffees, my iguana, cycling, cooking, writing, editing, yes even helping, but there are things I can't stand. At all: time wasters.

A few days ago on Twitter, I connected with a guy who apparently studies English Literature and loves reading. Good. I like people who love books. I followed him back. We communicated and had a bit of a harmless banter; enjoyable, nothing offensive. Yesterday, he sent me a message and asked me if I could give him feedback on a bit of short fiction. Because I like to help, I agreed and shortly after I stared at the screen in disbelief.
Did he really mean that? That piece of short (really short) fiction was so badly written, even a 10-year-old would have done a better job. I was gobsmacked. I wondered if that guy is taking the piss, but I take things like that seriously, so I spent roughly ten minutes on giving him the feedback he wanted. Then I fought hard if I should tell him to better not continue with writing. I ended up telling him that the bit looked like a 9-year-old wrote it and that he has a long way ahead of him.
He got back to me, saying it was the most useful feedback he ever received. I thought he's just having a laugh.
When I asked him if he's only joking, he answered saying it wasn't even serious writing and it took him about five minutes to jot the stuff down, but he had some other writing he'd like feedback for.

Guess you can imagine my response. Yep, told him where to shove it.

As an editor I find it insulting that someone would send me such a text for feedback. I would have given him credit for not being a native, but jotting down some shite and asking me for feedback is plain rude and a waste of my time. I could have written an e-mail, made a coffee, given the iguana a head rub, edited my own stuff...
That said, next time someone random asks for feedback, they can pay cash upfront. Simple as that.

How to piss me off. Instantly.

Yesterday evening, I had my pulse race through my body. Why? I was on Twitter and did ignore the one rule I'd made: look at people's time line! I thanked the person (a publishing company with at least two  offices) who had followed me and kindly retweeted one of my tweets. So, there I go, thank publishing company and follow. I have a friend who's trying to land a deal and whenever I see something fits, I'll send him the link with the words: this one maybe? He wants to be traditionally published in paperback. The following conversation happened between this 'publishing company' and me. And as you can see, I wasn't amused:



Me:  I love the Aussies and Kiwis, so you're more than welcome ;-) Do you publish paperbacks, too?
Me:  and why don't you have a website? Or if you have one, why don't you have a link to it?
(Then clicking the link in their profile, I was guided to their Amazon page. The pictures of the book, the author. Aha, I thought.)
Me:  or are you (insert name of promoted author/Amazon page).
Him:  Hi Stella. (Insert author name) here. I co-write novels with my son, (insert son's name). We both Kiwis. Our novels are in paperback & ebook
Me thinking: I knew it. Not a publishing company as advertised. Probably just an imprint to be able to be accepted by printers. Cheeky!
Him:  Will add you on Linked In also. We are various listings online for our literary and film careers, but no actual website..
Me (thinking): huh? No! I don't want to be linked to several websites, don't you dare! And a publishing company without a website, is more than suspicious to me.
Him:  Stella, if u have a Kindle reader, our historical novel (name of the book) is free until Monday night UKtime on Amazon
Me (thinking): I knew it! Fuck off, man! 
Me:  I react rather pissed off when one spams me like that. We only just met and you're trying to 'sell' me your book. Not good.
Him:  What?? You asked about where you can find more info (in serveral tweets) and I merely mentioned our book is now free..no spam
Me (thinking): No, I didn't! Should have checked your time line and steered clear.
Me:  I asked if you do paperbacks because I thought you're a publisher and if you have a website.That's all.Hate historical fiction
Him (second attempt to 'sell' it to me):  If you do not wish to grab our book while it's free, then that's fine, take it or leave it. Otherwise, have a nice day.

Me:  Nope I don't want to grab it. I asked a few questions to clarify. Now I know you're an author who claims to be a publishing company

I still love Aussies and Kiwis, but not this one.
Looking at the time line, the author promotes the book like 24/7. Seriously. I'm not an angel when it comes to promotion and I've been all over the place, but this, I think, is the wrong way. I ask questions when I'm suspicious, and often I'm right to be so.

Who do you call talented?

Those of you who know me also know that I don't hold back when I get an overdose of something that annoys me. As the title already hints: it's the Indies again. I'm an Indie author myself and I do get invites (perhaps not anymore after today) to do guest posts and interviews, I am busy networking on social media sites and I even connect people if I see fit.

It's all good and wonderful to help people, it's all perfectly fine to do blog tours and get your name out there, but what I find increasingly sickening is the mutual appreciation society. If you look on Indie blogs you see 'Today I'm talking to the incredibly talented Indie author xyz'. That, to be honest, makes me feel incredibly. Sick that is.

I see that everywhere when Indies talk to each other, one says, your success is well deserved and the answer will be: so is yours, you're so talented. But how many of those talented people have read the other talented's work, be it a longer excerpt or a full novel? I would guess not even 50%. Isn't that like going past a restaurant, looking at the menu and then saying, the food is really good in here?

For an interview you don't necessarily read the work, all you need is a rough overview about what the person is doing. That's all okay, but calling someone talented just because the person happens to be in the same boat is just wrong. What do you do if you then read the author's book and find he or she's not so talented?

I often feel like Indies think they need to blow up smoke each other's arses just to maintain the friendly tone, but isn't it enough to wish each other well?

Yes, I have a few people I can confidently recommend to someone, because I find their writing engaging, their stories interesting and them in general talented. Those will know it because I have told them several times. But you will not see me telling an author he's talented when I didn't read at least enough to form an opinion.

Look around on Twitter, those who follow each other to compliment each other; it's just a big love-you-writing fest. Sorry, just because you love my writing, doesn't mean I will love yours, too.

Okay, rant over. 

Happy weekend, everyone :-)

The troubles with Blogger site feed. A rant

Some of you will have heard my cries for help about six months ago, then again three months ago and finally today again. The reason: readers of my blog who wanted to subscribe, couldn't. I added the gadget 'stalk me via 'e-mail' button, to provide at least some sort of possibility to follow, but it wasn't what I wanted. I like it nice and clean.
Searching for an explanation via Internet left me puzzled. What I found were terms like feed burner (I might burn food, but I haven't got a clue what that feed burner thing does or is used for), redirect link(?), Blogger feed url, etc. I wouldn't know how Blogger feeds urls. I feed my animal and myself, and that works just fine. If I have visitors, I even feed them.
You see I love my facebook friends, because they rock. I posted my cry for help in the afternoon and had two people immediately replying, trying to help. Now Sudam, the wonderful man, is an IT wizard and that, you can imagine, left me with my head nearly exploding. I was even more confused after his kind help and the links he sent me.
Rachel, the lovely girl and I, we messaged back and forth until she had to leave and all the while I e-mailed with my friend Marcos (50 e-mails!) including screen shots on my side and finding solutions on his side. To no avail. I was devastated.
He finally started his own blog to find out how it's working, advised me to delete my blog url from that field and asked me to change 'full' to 'none' and back (saving between the steps. And don't ask me what that's for, if you did ask if I had a clue, I'd probably say exactly that: 'none', while I'm 'full' of anger.) So I did as he asked me and miraculously, the feed is now working.

But I wonder:
Why is there no explanation out there following the elimination process?
Questions like: if you go to your dashboard/design, settings/other and where it says Post Feed Redirect URL, is that field empty? Then it wouldn't be such a problem, would it? Best with screen shots. 
But no, all you get is an array full of terms nobody is able to understand, at least not this person here. I'm usually not that stupid with technique. But this tiny error of having my blog url in that field, kept people from subscribing.
At least it's working now and everyone who'd like to see what I'm up to, my rants or how the iguana is can subscribe. Wonderful world of Blogging, eh?
Thank you to my three brave friends who tried to shed light on the subject. You guys are awesome!

And to finish on a humorous note, this one here makes me smile every time:

And you call yourself a reviewer?

Did I get your attention? Good. Now you might want to make yourself a cuppa and take a seat. It won't be a minute.
First I'd like to say that I don't include all reviewers; it's merely about a trend I observed and don't approve of.

Ready? Okay, then my rant starts now. With self-publishing, a new trend has evolved: self-acclaimed reviewers who will read and 'review' self-published authors' books. Now I'm certainly all for it, it helps to get the word out there and it's also often balm for the author's soul. If done right, that is. Since I'm self-published myself, I went on the hunt for a few so-called reviewers. What I found shocked me. Many state in their policies they won't post reviews for books with less than three stars. wooden spoons, tanks, monkeys -- whatever they use for their ratings. I find that rather peculiar, if I'm honest. Many say they will e-mail the author the exact reasons as to why they won't post a review. My bet is that many of those authors rub their little hands, happy they got away, ignore the reasons and carry on with promotion. What I don't understand is why people still believe a review is for the author. It's not. It's for the potential new reader to see if it's for her or for him. Surely the author benefits from a review; if it's positive they'll stick it on their blog (I do), if it's negative and packed with constructive comments, they hopefully learn and crack on with the correction.
Surely, opinions differ and sometimes people just don't like the book. Happens.

But why the fear of posting something negative? I mean as authors we should edit and polish our books to the point that the story flows with no holes or inconsistencies, the grammar and punctuation is up to a certain standard and the formatting is correct. If a book doesn't reach that standard, I find, readers should be made aware. With pressing the publish-button, an author hands over the book to the public and with it puts it into the limelight which may or may not result in negative feedback. Of course we are delicate souls, but we also ask people to pay money for our humble scribblings and not to forget, ask them for their time. Especially reviewers' time. It's lovely from reviewers not wanting to hurt anyone, but it's also a bit dishonest. As a reader I don't click on a review blog to have recommendations only, I click on a review blog to make up my mind. And I want to know the truth. If I only find positive reviews and recommendations, I don't know if I can take this blog seriously. To me that's not a review blog, it's a blog of a reader who recommends some books. That's an entirely different animal.

If a reviewer doesn't like the character or storyline or maybe the writing as much, fine. I didn't like the bestseller One Day, not one bit of it. Tried twice, then threw it across the room. As long as one can give valuable reasons, there's no point of not telling the world. I'm not asking to tear a book apart, but to post the negative as well. Or change your blog name to reader's picks or something like that. A reviewer is someone who gives an objective opinion of the book he or she's been given. Selecting only the positive, I find, won't earn you credits in the long run.
Authors don't need protection, they know full well what they're doing. Well, mostly.
It's the readers who need protection. Protection of those books that 'reviewers' find too crappy to even post.

Take Big Al, for instance, a great reviewer who knows he does and is not afraid to post negative feedback. As a result he has a queue from here to the moon and back, having to recruit more people who know what they're doing.

And since we're at it, I need to get somthing else off my chest: if you don't know how to review, don't do it at all. I had so-called reviewers spoiling the plot of my book, I had reviewers who anticipated hot and raunchy sex-scenes in my paranormal romantic comedy and I had a few who didn't even have a clue what conflict means in a novel. If you want to call yourself a reviewer, learn how to do it first.
Know the genre, don't spoil the plot and most of all: be honest and constructive.

Now if that's not food for thoughts, I don't know. What I certainly know is that I'll go on quite a few of black lists after this. Time to open the Champagne, right? Just kidding.

Have a nice Sunday.