At the bottom of each post, you'll notice numbers that rate the quality of our prose. We're doing this because:
(1.) We believe the subjectivity of storytelling does not excuse sloppy writing. Far too many websites push inferior penmanship and we don’t want to join that bandwagon.
(2.) As apprentices of the craft, we wish to map our progress as writers and set benchmarks both transparent and verifiable. Both Autocrit and ProWritingAid offer free web versions of their products where readers can double-check our scores.
(3.) Students often read prose to improve their vocabulary and grammar, and we wish to assure them (and teachers) the Weekly Chokus does not pose foul tripe as competent wordsmithery.
We do not claim our approach is infallible, but it keeps us honest and provides easy accountability. We aspire to write better for our readers. Now, we do occasionally disregard issues flagged by these softwares in the interest of style and fluency, hence the marginally lower scores for certain pieces.
We chose Autocrit because its developers specifically designed the product for fiction writers. ProWritingAid we picked for its broad suite of reports that impel us to edit precisely. But please remember the scores we report for our “newsflash fiction” pieces exclude the snippets of published news resolving the stories.
We also use NaturalReader (a fantastic text-to-speech tool) for final tune-ups. Inarguably the most important step in editing our work is reading (or hearing) it out aloud.
The Weekly Chokus will henceforth (September 2020) only publish original content that scores above 90/100.