Parts is parts

[pjthompson]

ETA: This is a scam by a crooked “How to get published” con artist. You can read about it here: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/012502.html

And I suppose it all depends on what parts of your ms. you choose as a sample. But here are my results: an unnatural mating of Stephen King and James Joyce.

A randomly chosen internalization piece from one of the characters:

SCAM MEME MESSAGE TELLING ME I WROTE LIKE STEPHEN KING.

A randomly chosen piece of description:

SCAM MEME MESSAGE TELLING ME I WROTE LIKE JAMES JOYCE.

A randomly chosen dialogue run:

SCAM MEME MESSAGE TELLING ME I WROTE LIKE STEPHEN KING.

Mirrored from Better Than Dead.

Comments

[marshallpayne1.livejournal.com]

King and Joyce, now there's a couple of writers I confuse with one another all the time. ;-)

[pjthompson]

I know. Same old same old. :-/

[hominysnark.livejournal.com]

My two Brown results were from the shiny new ST prologue and my journal.

At least I'm consistent.

[pjthompson]

Yeah, maybe that's my problem: I'm a schizo writer.

[kmkibble75.livejournal.com]

I guess that's a pretty cool combination to have...

[pjthompson]

I guess so. Not sure what it means, but I guess so.

[nycshelly.livejournal.com]

hmmmm.... I tried different works. Maybe I should've tried different pieces from the same work. And I got Stephen King twice.

[pjthompson]

I'd be interested to see what their criteria are.

[darkspires.livejournal.com]

I got James Joyce twice on two different pieces, Dan Brown twich on two different pieces and a myriad of other one offs on assorted pieces. I guess this makes me schitzo.

[pjthompson]

I guess this makes their process of sorting data flawed. :-)