In Defense of Transparency

Empty flattery is the scourge of the creative process. There is no value in coddling, or swaddling artist’s egos like newborn babes. Serious writers are constantly on the lookout for readers who will give them honest feedback before they send their wares out into the submissions grinder.

TQR is an extension of this ideology. Though part of the ‘submissions grinder’, its transparent vetting process – exemplified most by the Terminal – is meant to show the venture capitalists and the investors the thought processes of those entrusted to read and evaluate their capital, give them insight into the ways in which their capital might be improved, and let the investors know that the process of finding that quarter’s capital gains is in good hands.

Some VCs, lacking the courage of their convictions, will characterize this transparency as an invasion of privacy and will shun TQR. Since TQR is in search of those VCs confident their capital will stand the test of time, let alone Terminal scrutiny, the loss of those subs mentioned in the last sentence is no loss at all, but understood to be the true first level in the TQR vetting process, phantom though it be.

Sincerely, TQR