> > > So who's interested? We've already got a poll going for "Who wants to read bad stories?", so now I guess we'll have one going for "Who wants to read OK stories?" :-)
> >
> > It occurs to me that the two need not be mutually exclusive, nor tied together in any particular way. I could post "ok" stories to an unadvertised page somewhere, yet still leave the door open for "bad stories" to be posted elsewhere, advertised or not. I just wish I could predict people's reactions, and I also wish there was more than just me putting my neck on the block, given that pretty much all Dave's early work is not only unpublishable but unpostable. Nuts.
>
> Well, again, I'm really not all that interested personally in reading bad stories (unless they are VERY bad). I don't read as much *good* stuff as I'd like to, and there's tons of crappy writing on the net already.
>
> Now, decent stuff by the two of you I'd love to see. The other stuff, unless properly commented on by the author and of the right caliber of badness, I'm uninterested in.
>
> Stephen

Er. Could you give some small examples of what "GOOD Really Bad fiction" looks like, in your opinion... as opposed to stuff that's simply "bad"? How do you tell the difference.

BTW I don't mean examples plagiarized from the Bulwer-Lytton competition. Writing that type of strangled prose takes waaay more effort than writing badly and sloppily -- it takes more effort than even writing well.