The reality is they’re not quite the same thing. First – there is no such thing as an “online” Daemonolatry organization. In this I mean we don’t have an online church or group with a degree system or course of study that just anyone can belong to. At most, we have an org sponsored website with an open forum for practicing Daemonolaters regardless their group affiliation and on that forum we have volunteer adepts and clergy who offer free initiate training courses for those wanting some sort of formal, structured, introduction into Daemonolatry.

Second – all of the Daemonolatry organizations I know of do NOT recruit membership, nor are they actively seeking members. For a lot of groups, you have to be local to be considered for membership. Oftentimes membership is at the discretion of the group.

Third – Most (not all) Daemonolatry organizations are merely groups whose members get together to socialize and worship. We’re not like some occult orgs where the entire purpose is teaching students the magickal arts or getting together to work magick. This doesn’t mean there aren’t magickal Daemonolatry organizations out there or that none of them are encouraging their members to embark on the The Great Work, there are, but they work much the same way. You can express your interest to join, but they will pick and choose who they will accept in.

Is this elitist? If having standards for membership is elitist, then yes. But you also have to remember that we don’t have the same kind of crazy ass drama a lot of occult organizations do, and this is why we don’t.  Yes, all groups are going to have a conflict here or there (put any more than one person in a room together and eventually there is going to be some conflict since not everyone is going to agree with everyone else 100% of the time) but we don’t have nearly the drama some other occult organizations have.  When we do have drama, it is usually due to one trouble maker who is new to a group anyway.

Besides – groups are overrated. Most people don’t realize, when they write to me to inquire about OFS, that first, we not a TYPE of Daemonolatry. Second, they don’t realize that we’re a real-world group specific to a specific city. We’re not national or international. Finally, they don’t seem to realize we’re an organization for WORSHIP and socialization specifically. Yes, sometimes we get together and talk Daemonic magick, but that was never the purpose of the group. We’re also not a teaching group (not all groups are). If we bring noobs into the group, the most they can hope for is some of us to offer a reading list and to answer questions. After all – a lot of magickal work and Work work is best suited to the individual on a solitary basis anyway.

About this time someone always chimes in, “But to learn Traditional GenDem type practices and inner-circle, inner-sanctum or advanced stuff you have to be in a group!”  For some stuff, yes. But it’s stuff that would only be of interest to specific people anyway.  I often think people are looking for some secret knowledge or something.

Don’t get me wrong – if you want to join a group for the right reason that’s one thing. But there are a lot of wrong reasons, too.

I’ve noticed that nowadays some of the big draws to group membership include:

• Titles (for the alleged prestige they have – everyone wants to be a priest)
• Secret Knowledge (usually so they can brag about it to someone else)
• Image (for some people keeping up the social image of being an occultist is key, not to mention all the cool kids are doing it.)

Some of the right reasons for group membership include:

• Personal edification and spiritual growth.
• Commiseration with others of the same faith.
• Sense of community.

But alas, the latter three are best suited to local groups or orgs where you can physically interact with the people and talk face-to-face, and it’s unlikely you’ll be able to find such a group on the Internet unless you are lucky enough to be invited to a private video-chat group (yes, they do exist).

Just remember that you don’t need a group to practice Daemonolatry and if you don’t have a local group it doesn’t mean you can’t start one.

I hear stuff like this all the time.

Well, it’s not my fault I was fired. One of my co-workers was an asshole so I stopped doing my job to avoid him. That asshole forced me to perform poorly and therefore I was fired, and it’s all someone else’s fault.  Never mind the conscious choice to quit performing the job. We control how we react to assholes, that’s a fact.

What ever happened to accountability? I was never allowed, as a child, to get away with anything. It was my fault even if I really didn’t do it. So I learned to accept blame and take responsibility for my actions (and in some cases the actions of others). This has carried through adulthood with me. When I got my first speeding ticket in 21 years the year before last – it was because I wasn’t paying attention to the speed limit signs posted and I was, in-fact, speeding. I have no one to blame but myself. I did not fight the ticket – I took my points, paid my fine, and I do my best to pay attention to speed limit signs

We all make mistakes and we all fuck up. It’s just that some of us get caught and others don’t.  I think it takes a bigger person and far more character and honor to accept responsibility for ourselves and our actions than it does to blame someone else. Sadly, I view those who blame others for their own shortcomings, failures, or mistakes as weak, without character and dishonorable. And I generally don’t spend a great deal of time with people like that if I allow them into my life at all. As a result, most of those I choose to spend my free time with are people who are accountable for their actions and who take self-responsibility.

I have to wonder – what happened? When did it become okay to blame everyone and everything else for our personal fuck-ups in life? When did our choices become everyone else’s responsibility?  I mean, I know not everyone is like this (I have the friends to prove it), but why is it becoming the norm? I think it’s something that we, as a society, should really look at.

I really try not to read reviews of my books. I do, but sometimes you just have to, no matter how brutal. I remember clamping my jaw, narrowing my eyes, and reading what was certain to be a scathing commentary befitting three stars.

“O’Connell’s scenes remind me of Anne Rice’s Sleeping Beauty books. Sure, there are some worthwhile scenes, but they’re totally contrived, just like Rice!”

Wait, back up. Was I just compared to Anne Rice? It was so unexpected that I literally had to read the review again. Trust me, perspective is everything here because I love Anne Rice, including her erotic books written as A. N. Roquelaure. For someone who hates Anne Rice, clearly this would be a slam.

Admittedly that three star review flattered me. But again, I would have never thought to compare myself to Anne Rice. Not in a million years. Our writing styles are totally different and my bestselling author designation isn’t even in the same league as hers. I’m small potatoes! Not to mention I haven’t read an Anne Rice novel in at least nineteen years.

I was also flattered and surprised when I heard readers comparing my OTS novels (written as Audrey Brice) to Jim Butcher, Lilith Saintcrow, and Juliet Blackwell (who I love, BTW) even though my writing style is nothing like those authors. I can only imagine these readers must be comparing theme to theme as opposed to writing style. Each writer has their own unique voice. My voice isn’t nearly as terse as Jim Butcher, or as meandering as Lilith Saintcrow, or even as precise as Juliet Blackwell. No, I’d actually say I’m more like a Stephen King without the word vomit. I don’t mince semantics or go on for pages showing the reader what my characters are wearing or what the weather is like. Nope – I’m more of an in-your-face kind of writer.

My writing style is about giving the reader what they absolutely need and leaving the rest to the imagination. This drives some readers crazy, especially those who love to be spoon fed tedious detail after tedious detail. I hate that. As a reader I skim through the tedious description in most fiction  just to get to the point.  IMHO long descriptive narratives are what you call padding or word-count boosting.  I’m one of those writers that, if it doesn’t move a story forward or help to create tension or mood, it doesn’t belong there. I make judgement calls on what gets left in and what stays out based on that. Am I always right in the choices I make? Probably not. But this is why you’ll find a lot of my novels on the shorter side. I refuse to pad.

Ultimately – I am me and have a unique writing style and writing  voice. So while I’m flattered to be compared to other writers out there, I think I stand with a lot of writers who would eventually like to be known without needing the comparison. It also means I don’t try to make my writing emulate anyone else’s. Like I said, there was a time in my teens that I tried to write like David Eddings. But after a few years of trying and falling short I had to accept the fact that I wasn’t David Eddings and never would be. No. I was Stephanie Connolly and no amount of emulation would change that.

As for who influenced me to become a writer or to write in general – that’s a really long list: Shakespeare, Jean Slaughter-Doty, Walter Farley, Stephen King, David Eddings, Dean Koontz, Piers Anthony, Dana Reed,  H. G. Wells, Arthur Conan Doyle, Edgar Allan Poe, Judy Bloom, Victoria Laurie, Madelyn Alt, Mary Shelley, Lawrence Watt-Evans  etc….   I could go on for pages. The ones listed here have been favorite authors at one point or another in my life. I’ve been reading voraciously since I was a small child and every book I’ve ever read has, in some way, influenced my writing.

About The FM Merry-Go-Round Blog Tour

Today’s post was inspired by the topic My Influences this month’s topic in the Merry-Go-Round Blog Tour, an ongoing tour where you, the reader, travel around the world from author’s blog to author’s blog. We have all sorts of writers at all stages in their writing career, so there’s something for everyone to enjoy.

If you want to get to know nearly twenty other writers and read their thoughts on their writing influences, check out the Merry-Go-Round Blog Tour.  I blog with this tour the 25th of every month.  Up next on the tour: Becky Pratt!

Today’s lifted blog prompt is about a writer’s image.

As the ‘celebrity’ networking, blogging, twittering rules go — don’t talk smack about others, don’t be a downer, don’t constantly talk about things you dislike or bad things that have happened to you, don’t get too personal, try to make others feel good about themselves, and respect others.  These are relatively easy rules to follow, even on the Internet.

Many writers I know keep their online presence very low key, and follow the rules to a T.  They really want to make sure they don’t upset anyone in fear it will destroy their careers. But in doing so they almost always sacrifice their personality. So instead of being the multi-dimensional, unique person they are, what their readers see are shells of their favorite authors writing blogs about writing.

I think I’ve done pretty well following the ‘rules’.  My only exception is politics. I am, for good or bad, very passionate about women’s issues and certain political ideas. I have also not been silent about my thoughts on reader etiquette, and if I have pet-peeves, I will most certainly share them (not directed at any specific individual).  Basically – I’m not afraid to speak my mind, but I won’t talk shit about people behind their backs in my blog and I won’t constantly be a negative Nellie.

So it does make me wonder what my author image is.  Do people, when they see my books on a bookstore shelf think to themselves, “I wouldn’t buy that woman’s books if you paid me because she’s a bitch!” Or do they grab the book without a second thought because they liked how I made them feel?

I would hope it would be the latter. However, I think Kurt Cobain said it best when he said, “I’d rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I’m not.”

There’s a lot of truth to that. Just because someone doesn’t talk crap about someone else online doesn’t mean they’re not a gossip behind closed doors. Just because someone doesn’t talk about their problems or hardships doesn’t mean they don’t have them. And just because someone is nice to people to their face, doesn’t mean they’re genuine.

I’d rather be genuine up front.

I’m wary of an untarnished image because chances are it’s hiding something large and ugly. While I agree that some things are better left off the web, I hope I never become one of those writers who is forced to be a shell of herself for the sake of a career.

Evidently some conservative women now believe that us liberal feminists (neither of which are bad words unless they escape the lips of a conservative) are down on stay-at-home-moms and are somehow marginalizing the job of being a wife and mother all because some women rolled their eyes at Mitt Romney’s wife running around the country speaking to issues of “working mothers”.

The argument of some women, and understandably so, is that Mrs. Romney is not coming from the same place as your average working mother or your average working woman. After all, most working mothers actually work outside the home, have to do their own grocery shopping, their own house cleaning, and don’t have nannies, maids, or personal assistants available as needed.  Most working (outside the home) moms are also not wealthy and many working (outside the home) moms work for far less than $20 an hour unless they were fortunate enough to get a good education and start their career before they had kids.

This of course, in the minds of some conservative women, translated to, “Liberal women are starting a war on women who choose to be stay-at-home mothers!”

Bullshit. We’re just asking you to not compare clocks to sausages.  One is not the other. A wealthy stay-at-home mom does NOT come from the same place as a lower-middle-class stay-at-h0me-mom whose husband might be lucky enough to pull down 50K a year (before taxes).

First, let me say that if you are a stay-at-home mom and you had that choice – bravo and good for you. I agree that being a mom and housewife is definitely work.  Also let me say there is nothing I would have loved more than if I’d had the choice to stay at home and be a mom. That would have been SO cool. But here’s the thing — not everyone has that choice (or luxury as some of us would call it). The fact of the matter is that it’s harder to be a mom who has to work a 40+ hour a week day job on top of her already huge responsibility of raising her children and keeping her house.

Don’t try to pretend it isn’t more work. You know it is (and you know who you are!)

The reality is that a lot of women have NO CHOICE but to work outside the home because it takes both she and her husband’s income to maintain the household and keep the children fed and clothed. I know a few women that, if they had a choice, they would most certainly have stayed home with their kids. I’ve also met women who said if they had to stay home with their kids 24/7 – they’d go bat-shit crazy. So it really depends on the woman. Some women are naturally more  domesticated, others are not.  Some women CHOOSE to not have kids at all – or to not get married because they have no desire to.

And that there, ladies, is the foundation of every argument concerning women as of late. Choice.

It seems some Conservatives want to take away women’s rights because they don’t think women are intelligent enough to make choices.

Most women just want to be able to make their own choices about their own bodies and their own futures and their own lives. Some of them may not want to depend on a man for anything. Others may want to at least have a good education and make sure that if they needed to be independent (or step up to help support the family) they could – just in case they ended up divorced, widowed, or their husband ends up out of work for any duration.

That’s a woman’s personal choice. Sometimes life takes those choices away from us as the case with infertility or the fact that it really does take two incomes to raise a family in this country unless you don’t mind living in poverty.

On further dissection and discussion I was basically told by my conservative friends that women who worked outside the home, who didn’t have kids and/or who weren’t married were feminists and going against nature — and that they had no worth in our culture. So basically, these women really believe their sole function in life is to bear children and raise them and if you’re a woman of non-child bearing years or you suffer infertility, or you’re just not maternal and don’t want kids, and if you don’t have a man in your life (or want a man in your life) — that you have no worth.

Yes. You heard me.

Evidently those of us who are forced to work outside the home or who choose not to have herds of children, or who can’t have children or who are without men in our lives are worthless to mankind. I was also told that women who don’t do their duty and have children are selfish.

If you are sufficiently pissed off by now – you should be, because many of these same women really do believe a woman should not be educated and each woman should be subservient to her husband and her only function in life should be pushing out babies and making dinner because that’s what she is biologically made to do (i.e. it’s Gods will).  If she’s not doing what God created her to do, well, I don’t know – maybe we can just grind her up for food?

Look – I don’t have a problem with women who CHOOSE this path for their own life.  If you want to be a housewife and mother and you have the opportunity to be a stay-at-home mom and you love it — go for it. More power to you! But don’t try to force your chosen lifestyle on the rest of us.

Don’t try to vilify working moms who may not have a choice in the matter if they don’t have the kind of money you have. Not everyone can afford to be a stay-at-home-mom and not everyone wants to be.

Don’t vilify women who can’t have kids or who have chosen not to have them.

And finally – don’t vilify women who want to have both a family and a career. Some women do aspire to more than just being a mom. That aspiration is not an attack on those who are content with their role as wife and mother, it simply means that women are individuals and they all have different aspirations and things in life that make them happy.

I didn’t hear anyone saying that being a mother was easy or that being a stay-at-home mom wasn’t work. It most certainly is.

We’re just saying that when it really comes down to it –  Mrs. Romney is not coming from the same place as working (outside the home) mothers in working class America. That’s all.

Mrs. Romney trying to tell all of you what your concerns are is like me, the infertile woman, telling you — the actual mothers — what your concerns are in raising your kids. You wouldn’t stand for that bullshit from someone like me. Why would you stand for that from a politicians wife? Makes sense to me.

Just sayin’.

***Funny side-note – I’m not a Democrat but most conservatives always insist that I’m a liberal anyway. LOL! Basically – if you’re a woman and don’t agree with them – you’re still a socialist liberal feminist (or Femi-Nazi depending who you talk to) even if you’re a moderate or an old-school fiscal conservative. However – I will proudly wear the mantel of liberal feminist. After all – I’m an infertile married women who does believe in choice, and forgive me for saying this, but being a stay-at-home mom sucks far less than having to work outside the home. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe that’s the last 26 brutal, sucky years in the work-force talking. Maybe I’m jealous that I can’t have kids or couldn’t afford not to work (especially if I had kids) because our house payment actually depends partly on my income. Maybe I’m jealous that women who get to stay-at-h0me and not have to have a day job (outside raising the kids and keeping the house) don’t have that kind of pressure on them to be able to bring enough home to make the house payment. Whatever it is, ladies, I really do think you have it good. You should feel blessed and thankful for your situation and maybe understand that if there is animosity toward you, it’s because you condemn others to make yourself feel good about what you do and maybe some of us are jealous that we don’t get that perk of not having to be personally responsible for bringing home the bacon. I would gladly trade that stressful responsibility if all I had to do was cook it. As it now stands I have to do both and so do millions of other American woman.

The response was, “You don’t, but they do.”

Yes, there are online groups who are nothing but mere dramatic societies. They’re actually quite entertaining if you’re bored.  But how, exactly, does that involve me? It only concerns me if they try to include me and I actually participate. If I, being the adult, refuse to pander to the drama by not reacting to it and not participating, then there is no drama. It’s one sided and eventually, once they figure out I won’t participate, those folks will wander off and find a more worthy target — someone who will participate.

I used to allow myself to get baited into other people’s online bullshit. The key phrase there is “used to”.  As I’ve gotten older (and wised up to the nonsense) I no longer involve myself in petty shit like that. The first reason being I don’t have that kind of time to waste. The second reason being my give-a-fuck broke back around 2009-2010 and I actually like my life better without it.

I finally realized I am secure enough in myself that I don’t care what strangers think of me.  They can hate me all they want. That won’t change the fact that I will write what I want to write, say what I want to say, and hang out with whoever I choose to hang out with. These people aren’t the reason I began writing. They’re not the reason I keep writing. My sun and moon does not rise and set on their opinions of me. I’ve lived my life (quite successfully) all these years without these people and I’ll live my remaining years without them, too.

Not to mention, if someone is that insecure that they have nothing better to do than talk shit about everyone else as if that makes them somehow *better* — that’s their business. Let them waste their life doing nothing useful.

It still amazes me how many people still get baited into online crap like this. Especially in the occult world.

Now in some instances you can actually show someone something, but after that the ball is in their court. They have to be able to take that information and apply it in a meaningful way that helps them accomplish a task or meet their goals.

I experience this a lot with magick. It dawned on me today just how many 101 books (even my own) only scratch a superficial surface when it comes to numerous magickal and spiritual practices. What gives these practices their depth and dimension are the realizations we have when exploring each topic more thoroughly and applying our foundational knowledge to the practice.

When studying Goetia, for example, I came to such a profound realization about certain things that I was literally mind-blown. I honestly thought I had discovered something new since I’d never seen anyone mention it anywhere.

Sydney J. Harris famously said “Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own.”  Magick is full of moments like this. Of course once you take a step back you realize that this idea is as old as the Gods themselves and other magicians practically spelled it out for you and you were just too ignorant to see what was staring you in the face all along – that self-congratulatory smugness dies a quick death.

My friend Goetic Nick (aptly nicknamed for his extensive work with Goetia) laughed when I shared my revelation. He said, and I have permission to quote him here, “Congratulations. Most people have to have that pointed out to them. That fact that you figured it out on your own speaks volumes.”

But this is a perfect example of how a teacher/guide can only lead the horse to water.   Some things can only be learned by drinking.

I can tell you to study this or that and that it relates to this or that, but you really need to put the study to practice and see how it all works together first hand in order to come to these realizations yourself. Never will you experience a more sober moment of clarity than that.

It’s food for thought.

Magus Elizabeth Tanner has been gifted some cursed magickal items. While trying to break the curse, she and her boyfriend Michael become suspects in a murder they didn’t commit. To clear their names they must find the real killer by delving into a dark bdsm underworld where sex magick and the Daemonic meet. Will they be able to find a killer, clear their names, and escape their descent into darkness?

Read an EXCERPT here.

Please note the links below will begin working as the book becomes available in different formats. It should be completely available in April 2012.

Available on Nook, Kindle, and in Paperback: Amazon or Barnes & Noble or it can be ordered through your local bookseller.

ISBN-13: 978-0978897536
ISBN-10: 0978897536

Please note that this book, like the first book in the series Outer Darkness, has a painted cover for the paperback and a different cover for the ebook.  The third book will not have a painted cover and the cover will be the same for both books.  :)

In all honesty, this could happen. However, you wouldn’t be able to blame it on all the fly-by-night authors out there.

First let me explain what I mean by fly-by-night authors. In some cases a fly-by-night author is someone who has that one book in them. Not two, not three, not fifty like real writers. No – they literally have just the one book. The chances of that one book selling a lot is slim to none. The chance of there being a sequel to that one book is even slimmer.  There are also two and three book authors who eventually fade away into obscurity. Next, some fly-by-night authors are people who think writing is a get rich quick scheme. They may put out a few short stories that they call books, but when those books tank, they disappear, too.

In occult writing we have this problem. There are a lot of fly-by-night authors who think they have a book in them and what they end up producing is  a chapbook here or there that simply repeats the information from well-written, popular, previously published books. Just go to Lulu and look up Satanism sometime and you’ll see what I mean. These books are often poorly written because not all occultists make good authors. With Lulu anyone can self publish, so the books are often poorly formatted as well. They are numerous because the younger generation sees writing as a glamorous career and figures anyone can do it. Some of us, evidently, make writing for a living look easy. Not only that, but when you have amateurs writing books who don’t know what it takes to write a book, what you end up with are chapbooks (i.e. essays) because very few of them actually breach 100 pages.

While some of these folks do really well with their books, most of them do not. This is usually because they don’t take the time to stop and understand what makes an indie author successful, even when it comes to occult publishing. Writing (anything) not only takes knowing one’s industry and knowing your material, but it also takes skill that goes beyond being able to use proper grammar and structure.

This example can be applied to other areas of publishing as well. Not all occultists are writers just as not all readers are writers — even though they think they are or could be. You either have the skill and talent for it – or you don’t.

Books by people who don’t have the right skills will fail. This, and this alone is why real writers should not be afraid of these kinds of writers and mislabel them “competition”.  Not to mention there is room in the world for everyone’s ideas and everyone’s books. Just because you wrote a book about pelicans doesn’t mean another book about pelicans is competition. It simply means the reader has more choices and readers really into pelicans will likely buy both books. Now if the other book about pelicans is better than yours it will likely see more sales, but that should just motivate you to write the best book you can from the get-go.

Finally, real writers keep writing. They keep producing books. Sure, some books will be better than others, but they keep writing. That’s where you have the advantage over the fly-by-nights. You’re likely prolific by your very nature and have been a writer for a long time (before it was cool or allegedly easy to be a writer). That alone puts you in a different league than the fly-by night. So don’t worry about them. You’re in a completely different league than they are and readers are smart enough to navigate the world of abundant reading material to find books worth reading.

All of that said, let me tell you what is more likely to send your first published book plummeting into obscurity.

1. Awful presentation and format.

2. Consistently poor grammar, structure, or spelling.

3. Lousy storytelling. I know an author who writes beautiful prose, but her craft is hit or miss.  In some of her work she builds to a climax that never materializes and her resolutions fall flat. So while she makes a tidy living writing, meh, the stories themselves could be better. As a reader, I’ll put up with less than perfect prose if the story and characters intrigue me. I am not so likely to return to an author who writes really well, but who lacks in the storytelling or character department. Admittedly some readers are opposite me. They want neat and tidy prose and will put up with a crappy story. Ideally you want your books to both have neat and tidy prose while also telling an engaging story with charismatic characters.

4. The fact that you only have one book, novella, novel, or short story available. Let’s be honest — you’re going to gain a following faster if you have more than one thing out.

5. Your lack of marketing. You do have to tell people about your book(s). The fact that it’s available is no guarantee anyone will be able to find it or even know it exists. So let them know, okay?

And there you go. Thanks for reading and have a fantabulous Friday!

She’s right. Many of us who grew up in the scarcity model of publishing (I love her terminology) did have a difficult time transitioning to the new way of thinking. I know that once I changed my thinking not only did I find more success with my writing, but my only use for a publisher now is to help grow my audience. I don’t know that I could go back to a ”professional” writer pay-scale based on the old model. Not after tasting a livable writing wage. (If you’re a writer and you want to contact me privately, we can discuss livable writing wages.)

And of course publishers can’t operate by paying their authors what myself and some other Indies are making. It’s a sad fact.  It used to be that you had to be published by a big publisher to gain legitimacy. There was no other way to get your books on the bookshelf. So if you were chosen for publication it was a big deal. As much as it pains me to say this – this is no longer the case. Now, anyone with a computer can be a published writer whether they’re any good or not.

Even so, I am not daunted by the direction the publishing industry is going. I think it’s exciting both as a reader and as a writer. With the new model, writers don’t have to write formulaic fiction anymore. Readers aren’t limited to what they can read, either. They will be more readily able to find books that include topics they’re interested in. Once taboo topics to a mainstream publisher, like Satanic characters who aren’t *evil* and sex magick, are no longer off the table. We can also write experimental fiction and test it on the market.

Big publishers will catch up and figure out how to make the current model work, it’s just going to take some time and they will never have a shortage of writers because there will always be writers who don’t want to do it themselves and who will work for lower wages in exchange for not having deal with the production/business side of things.  Some publishers have even opened up editorial arms to help DIY authors edit and format their MS for publication (a brilliant move IMHO).

What I see in the current model is opportunity for a larger number of writers. What do you see?