Only I give teardown-style notes. That's not ego, it's structure. The whole model works because there's one cold, distant read, from one person, with nothing to gain either way. The second other members start piling on with their own "brutal honesty," this turns into a mob, and nobody's pages are safe to post here.
When I break down a submission, that read is mine to give. It'll be direct. It might sting. It's not personal, and it's not up for debate in the moment, the whole value is a fresh, undiluted read, not a negotiation.
Stick to what's useful, a genuine reaction, a question, a related observation. No dogpiling. No "well actually the story is secretly great." If it's not your pages being discussed, it's not your fight.
You don't have to agree with anything I said, or even respond. What you don't get to do is explain your intentions after the fact to relitigate the read. Take what's useful, leave what isn't.
No harassment, pile-ons, or personal attacks, on me, on featured writers, on anyone. Feedback on someone's pages is fair game. Feedback on someone as a person is not.
The entire premise of Fresh Eyes is that you can trust the read because it's fair, cold, and consistent. That trust is the product. Guard it like it's the only thing keeping this place worth showing up to, because it is. Repeated violations get a warning, then a removal, I'd rather have a smaller room that's safe to submit real work into than a big one that isn't.