Well, the QT Blog has been up and running for a while now. The five QueryTracker blog authors have grown a lot, not only as a blog team, but professionally. QueryTracker has grown too. The database now contains more advanced features and includes publishers in addition to agents in the searchable database.
I attend conferences, workshops and writers' groups and am always amazed how many writers are familiar with QueryTracker's main site.
Just in case we have subscribers who don't know how QT came about or don't use the main site, I'm going to repost sections from one of my first articles on this blog.
The what, why and who of QueryTracker.netMary
The first time I met Patrick McDonald, the creator of QueryTracker, was when he emailed to congratulate me for signing with an agent. Up until that point, QueryTracker had been a tool.
I searched for agents by genre; researched them through the QT links to the agency websites, AgentQuery and Predators & Editors that were on the QT agent profiles; logged my query responses; and finally, clicked on the sunglass-wearing smiley icon indicating I'd received an offer of representation. I dutifully filled out my success story interview and expected to leave QueryTracker.net behind. Wrong!
There is a QueryTracker.net forum. Did you know that? I'm hooked. I no longer need the query tracking features of the main site, but I'm a regular on the forum, which I didn't discover until after I had signed with my agent. ...and then there's this blog. Hmmm. QT feels like family now.
One of the most remarkable things about QueryTracker.net is the person behind the site. I had always thought that QT was a commercial endeavor created to generate income for... someone. Turns out that the someone was an aspiring writer named Patrick McDonald, who had become frustrated with the overwhelming and confusing submission process. He created QT not to make money, but to simplify the query process. Once he came up with a way to keep track of which agents had been queried and their responses, he decided it would be more effective if he made it a "social data gathering site" where lots of writers could input data about agents based on their personal experiences thereby revealing patterns in agent requests, response times and preferences.
The result is brilliant! While using QT's main site, I knew (based on other writers' input) that one agent tended to take eight weeks to respond while another averaged only two days. I could tell which agents rejected by non-response; this kept me from re-querying or becoming angsty when I didn't hear back within a reasonable period of time. I could arrange my selected agents in order of desirability, which dictated my submission schedule. The most important thing was I felt informed while I queried. That goes a long way in a process that is shrouded in mystery and misinformation. Any writer who has had to keep up with queries and responses can appreciate the value of real information.
What? A social data gathering site to help aspiring authors submit to agents intelligently. Why? To simplify and demystify the query process. Who? Writers' advocate extraordinaire, Patrick McDonald.
Have a great week, everyone!