DeLauro was in office when ICE first became a thing. In fact, she voted *against* the bill that created the organization.

The DeLauro of the past tried to prevent what the DeLauro of the present is happy to uphold.

Awesome! But it took us, like, ten Bluesky posts to get to that information. Please put it on your websiiiite 😩

The lack of clarity is a red flag, especially when combined with the very extensive Terms of Service clause.

They don't need to be as long as Ninth Letter, but providing basic info (# of poems in a packet, yes/no to simultaneous subs, etc.) is standard.

N...no? Not without some basic information being readily available, like the amount of poems you want per submission.

Some pubs only consider 1 poem at a time, like Split Lip. Some want 3-5, meaning not just a single poem. Some have line or page length requirements.

For clarity on what I'm saying, screenshots from Ninth Letter.

You might have a more extensive list somewhere, but it is not apparent to me, even after searching.

Here's what I see on Submittable. The website only links to Submittable.

To make sure I'm not having a tech issue, I looked at three other pubs: Copper Nickel, Ninth Letter, and Iron Horse.

All have rules listed on their websites proper, at the top of Submittable, and in the guideline dropdowns.

I didn't see any trolling in the conversation that was posted. Did they omit part of the exchange?

2) These rules are hidden away, so you likely won't see them unless you go hunting.

Anything like this should be clearly visible on a publication's submission portal. The fact that it isn't makes the whole thing come across like a scam, even if that isn't the intention.

Two things I haven't seen brought up that are big red flags:

1) These are the only submission guidelines @ogre.red seems to have. They don't provide even basic clarity on what to send (i.e. how many poems to include in a packet).

I don't think I've ever seen that before, even from tiny indie pubs.

I'm happy to accept that the TOS was just badly worded, as it looks like @ogre.red is changing it.

However, this comment (and others from that conversation) have really bothered me.

The magazine has published many good and kind people, so the EiC's extremely mean replies are really disappointing 🙁

I'm not prepared to call this a win. The executive already doesn't follow the law, so why would they start now?

I hope these do some good, but I doubt it.

It was 🙈

patch.com/vermont/acro...