Prognostojection is an art practiced by writers who should not be day traders*--the obsessive-compulsive ones--and can only be pursued once one knows more of the ins and outs of the writing world. This is the art of looking at the rejections of others and using that to guess where one's own submission stands in the process.

Some venues have a consistent flow of submission and rejection. For example, in the snail mail world, F&SF always makes a fast turn-around. In the e-mail submission world, Venues like Fantasy and Lone Star Stories are very good about getting stories turned around quickly. Other venues work in batches, elimination a lot of stories from their slush pile, and then not moving anything for a few weeks....or months. Other venues have no pattern at all to their rejections, a terrible source of frustration to prognostojectors.

So, where does one begin?

While one can use Ralan's (or the publication's own guidelines) to get the editor's estimate of the turn around time, there's nothing quite as good as real-time data for this. There are several sources of this kind of information, including Duotrope's What's New page, The Black Hole or the ra_log. Forums can also supplement this info, as some editors actually post their progress on their forums. There are also writing group forums which post rejections and acceptances.

In my case, Duotrope turns out to be the main source, as it appears to have the most data coming in. It does seem to favor e-mail submission venues, while snail mail submissions often show up more readily on the Black Hole. So, say that I have a story out at Pear Noir! (I'm intentionally using a venue I don't know). I go to the What's New (in the last seven days) page and check the alphabetical list. I find this:

376. 2-day form rejection from Pear Noir!.
377. 9-day form rejection from Pear Noir!.
378. 13-day form rejection from Pear Noir!.
379. 13-day rejection from Pear Noir!.

Wow, that tells me that they're rejecting pretty quickly. If my story has been there 15 days....that might mean that it made the first cut (or it never got there). If my story has been there two days, then I can't be sure, so I can click on the name of the magazine, and Duotrope brings up the page for that specific publication, which gives me a lot more information.


Accuracy: We have received 121 reports within the past 12 months, not including pending responses or ignored reports. 6 responses are pending

There are still some other stories waiting as well, 6 of them. (Experienced practitioners are aware that this datum can be ruined by a few people forgetting to update their submission reports).


Days Reported 1 | 12 | 102 (min | avg | max)

Oh, so on average, it takes 12 days.


Most recent response reported was received on 15 Feb 2009.
Responses have been received for submissions sent as recently as 12 Feb 2009.

Wait a minute! They've responded to people who sent things as late as the 12th? I sent mine back on the 2nd! What does that mean? Are they holding it for consideration? Did I miss an e-mail? ::goes to check the spam filter::

The Black Hole and other venues can verify this data, and let you see when they're responding to writers. All in all, we can pull a lot of information out of these pages--just remember that every bit of bad data recorded skews the statistics.

Another use of this is getting a sense when huge clumps of rejections are coming. For example, if you submitted to an anthology, they will often do mass rejections. Rejections from a recent anthology filled the rejection logs in the last week, with many writers become more and more hopeful when their rejection didn't come...only to be crushed when a TOC came out without their names on it. (We don't know what Communication Fail happened there.)

On occasion, a magazine or journal does the same thing, dumping a wide time-span worth of rejections at once.

321. 35-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
322. 65-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
323. 69-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
324. 69-day personal rejection from Missouri Review.
325. 77-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
326. 80-day personal rejection from Missouri Review.
327. 81-day personal rejection from Missouri Review.
328. 131-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
329. 161-day form rejection from Missouri Review.
330. 240-day form rejection from Missouri Review

OK, this venue must read in spurts. At this point, though, the 240-day writer can console him or herself with the thought that they were held the longest (see 'Rejectomancy'), while the 35-day writer can say that at least the publication didn't hold onto their work forever before rejecting it. Something for everyone!

And if you have a 120-day story at that venue? Prognostojection suggests you're being held....or your rejection is on its way. Go check your spam filter.

As an art, this is one only practiced by the OCD among us. It does us no good whatsoever (like looking at the losses on our 401Ks right now), but we continue to do it because we just can't help ourselves....

So do you know any sites for collecting Prognostojection data? Please?

_________________________________
*Why not day traders? I learned this back when I was a Gifted and Talented Specialist. I ran the school's stock market competition, and therefore also got to play free. (Essentially, you were given 100,000 and three months.) Two of the three times I played, I won the state teacher's bracket. But I found that I quickly became compulsive about checking my stocks, often several times an hour. I was good at it, but it was eating up my world. So in the middle of the third season, I dropped out cold turkey and never played again. (That was the time I didn't win.)