SCBWI's Blueboard - A Message & Chat Board

Genres & Age Categories => Magazines & Ezines => Topic started by: ChickenGrease on December 01, 2013, 07:54 AM

Title: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: ChickenGrease on December 01, 2013, 07:54 AM
What do you guys think?  Is a longer response time from Cricket better than a shorter response time?  For example, having one poem rejected in one month, but another still pending after six months.

I just like to hope!  :sigh
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: Anne Marie on December 01, 2013, 08:52 AM
I don't think it's a guarantee, as there are so many variables about where in the process your ms might be, but I think you can allow yourself a bit of hope. :)

Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: Schriscoe on December 01, 2013, 08:56 AM
Hi Poodles...I say be hopeful :)

I have a sub out since April. I SQ'ed them and this is there response:

Your manuscript is still circulating among our editors. We appreciate your patience as we work through our recent reorganization!


Hope this means it is being considered :shrug:

Best of luck!
Sharon
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: ChickenGrease on December 01, 2013, 11:38 AM
Schriscoe, that's awesome, and it sounds very promising, in my opinion!  Obviously, it made it past the first readers!  :sun
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: JulieM on December 01, 2013, 01:09 PM
...but don't let questions like this drive you bonkers! It may be a good sign, or they may be overwhelmed/sick/on holidays. You just never can tell. Not wanting to rain on your parade though. Just, from my own personal experience, try to distract yourself with other work until you do hear back. Best wishes!
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: DianaM on December 01, 2013, 04:50 PM
You can drive yourself crazy trying to read tea leaves. But... I'd say, yes! Seems like there's good reason to be hopeful. Based on anecdotal information, it does seem like their positive responses take a bit longer.  :goodluck Try to write something new to distract yourself. :)
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: CarrieF on December 01, 2013, 05:02 PM
I think a longer response time is a somewhat hopeful sign. They use first readers to cull the slush, and then I believe the manuscripts are passed among several editors before any decisions are made. Most of my acceptances have taken well over 6 months. That said, I've also received a form rejection after 9+ months of waiting. Diana's advice is good - write something new!
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: ChickenGrease on December 02, 2013, 11:18 AM
Thanks for the responses everyone!  I have definitely been working on new stories!   :oncomputer
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: Sara on December 02, 2013, 07:01 PM
Blah. Just got a form R today on a snail mail fiction sub from 12/1/12--one year ago! I resubbed by Submittable in August, and that still reads "In Progress," so I'm not quite sure what to do now...
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: Ev on December 02, 2013, 09:13 PM
Hugs, Sara, on the rejection. I'm sorry.

I would advise doing nothing about your resubmission.  There's even a chance it might still get an acceptance.  That happened to me once with one of the other bug mags.  I hadn't heard a response to my sub long after the posted expected response time.  Back then, they said not to status query, but just to resubmit and say it was a resubmission.  My resubmission got an acceptance from an editor.  Several months after my acceptance, I finally heard from my original sub and the first reader had rejected it.  Just reinforced for me how very subjective this whole publishing process is.

Good luck on your waiting, Poodlesnoodles.
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: CarrieF on December 03, 2013, 06:50 AM
Sorry, Sara. I wouldn't take the form personally - I don't think I've ever gotten a 'personal' rejection from them - it's either an acceptance, or a form R. And I agree with Ev - just leave the piece in Submittable and see what happens. Unless you are in a hurry to submit somewhere else. I think there's an option in Submittable to withdraw a piece.
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: Sara on December 03, 2013, 08:52 AM
Thanks, Ev and Carrie. I'll leave it in Submittable for now and see what happens. A speck of hope is better than no hope, right?  :lol3
Title: Re: Cricket - Is a longer response time better?
Post by: ChickenGrease on December 03, 2013, 11:18 AM
Wow, that's really interesting, Ev!  I guess what a first reader didn't like, the editor loved! 

Definitely leave it in Submittable, Sara!