I've been thinking about yesterday's #queryfail -- agents posting and sometimes snarking on choice lines from bad queries. (I caught on very late last night, and I use Twitter quite regularly. That's the kind of learning curve that's involved with Twitter, and one of the reasons it can be a real lightning rod sometimes.) Quite predictably, today there's been some backlash.
I thought #queryfail was hilarious. But the anonymous post at 1:21 PM yesterday here makes an absolutely excellent point. A point that's even more relevant BECAUSE it's anonymous.
As with most humor, #queryfail doesn't represent a balanced transaction.
No matter how informative #queryfail is, no matter how much some writers really DO need to do their research and use spellcheck? Acts of regular blogging and/or twittering don't affect the balance of power between those who submit, and those who accept. Whatever else has changed since we all got glued to the WWW in 1993, that basic transaction hasn't.
If a group of writers chose to have an #agentfail day, even if the guilty were depicted at the same level of anonymity? The consequences for the writers would be dramatically different. I've only been an editor for about three months, and already I've had some chances to see that for myself.
So as much as I did find it amusing and now am going to be a joykilling asshole? #queryfail was a little like watching the cool kids in the cafeteria trip the kids who are going to still be living in their parents' basements when they're 40. Is there a point, besides that it's funny? Really?