[Michael Cantor]

It's an intriguing thought. I have any number of half-finished pieces where I thought the idea was good, but what came out was dismal, and they're in such bad shape that I normally wouldn't post them here, even with a disclaimer.

If we go ahaead with this - and it could be interesting - I would argue for a separate Forum, like Fiction or Translations - where it would be understood that the poem would go up accompanied by an explanation from the writer, up front, as to what he/she was trying to do, and the problems encountered. It would be very different from our normal Forums in that the poet would be explaining from the start - normally we try to discourage that, to get a "cleaner" reading - and I would assume that response would be more "essay" type, rather than lists of nits.

I don't think we should encourage this approach in the existing Forums, because it could easily lead to a bastardization of the posting and critting process. We'd see too many lengthy explications before relatively finished poems, too many objections to crits because the reader didn't understand that this was a "problem" piece, there could be confusion and the original function of the Forum could diminish.

Met and non-Met could be combined on the new Intensive Care Forum (okay, be positive if you must and call it Fresh Start), and maybe a three or six month trial period before committing to it should be considered. Another concern is that some of our "gotta post a new poem every week or I'll drown" brethren will use this Forum as a safety valve they don't have anything decent available on Day Seven. Mods might consider limits such as (a) only one poem every two weeks in Intensive Care, and (b) posts here count towards the one-a-week rule. And I would push for a rule that only established members (100 or even 250 total posts) could post for critique in Intensive Care. (My concern is that it doesn't turn into a Beginner's Magnet.)