Writing: I've been reviewing a 8000 word piece. One critique group really liked the piece and didn't have much to say about it other than how great it was; the other (more rigorous) critique group liked parts of it, and stomped hard on parts they didn't like. I'm similarly of two minds, and find myself second-guessing what I've got. There are certainly some mechanical issues with the manuscript that the favorable group didn't flag. There are objections to style and what I'm going to call genre requirements from the rigorous group that I was doing on purpose, and I'm cautiously deciding which ones are critiques of the manuscript and which are critiques of story type. My sense is that this is an idea story, that the ideas are really cool, and that I need to flesh out the characters some more to make them more believable.