I am reasonably certain that some in the reading world will see my recommendations and simply wish to flame the hell out of me with such thoughtful responses as, "Dude you suck, don't be a pussy" or "It is the nature of productive critical review that every work be subjected to the scrutiny of the experienced eye and that the work product and ongoing efforts of the craftsman will greatly improve through the glowing hot forging process of hostile and brutal review."

The first quote seems a bit insufficient. The second quote at least merits consideration. As a writer, I might be inclined to consider the second and flame back at the first. I advise reviewers or commenting parties (that want to find their comment taken seriously by an author) that their comment should tend towards the second and less to the first.

Does this mean I work from the "catch more flies with sugar than vinegar" mind set, that I am some pantywaist, new age, goody-goody who is out to soften the world by enforcing a wimpy kindness quotient? No, it is more the realization that, well, yes it is true you kill more flies with a nuclear weapon than with a fly swatter, but the fallout doesn't work out so well for the rest of the community. I simply think it is better to avoid letting reviews blow shit up without good cause.

Who knows what work of art will strike a chord with people? What bit of story will be the next hot thing? When a writer floats what seems to you to be a silly idea, remember, there's no chance anyone would watch a cowboy movie set in space - except that Star Wars thing. Ain't nobody knows nothing.