Pulling over a convo from elsewhere re: offering feedback to authors. When authors admit that certain feedback wasn't helpful, it can be misconstrued as them rejecting criticism. More likely, it means that feedback was, well, unhelpful, but for a reason, such as...

Criticism of something in an already published book. Even if it's valid, we can't fix it, so now we just feel bad/anxious etc about that.
Exception: if it's a simply fixed issue in a recent release. Typos, having ppl talk in wolf form, taking off shirts 2x...I can fix these.

For unpublished work, feedback is much more welcome. But it needs to be specific. "I didn't like it" isn't as helpful as one might think ;) Nor is something more specific but still general, like "I found some parts slow" or "I found some characters boring."

Generalizations work for reviews, which are aimed at readers. Author need more. Which part is slow? Which characters are boring? Without more guidance, we'll either dismiss the criticism or we'll tear apart the mss changing things that don't need changing.

When giving feedback, include the positive. I've had students who argue against this, saying writers just need to grow thicker skin. No, we need to know what we're doing *right* or we'll fuss with that, too :) Point out what's broken AND what's not.

For writers, learning how to filter criticism is as much a skill as learning how to give it. Don't accept every criticism as valid. Listen for patterns & listen to your gut. If your gut rejects it, learn the diff between "Not valid for my story" & "Too much work to fix" ;)

Yeah, the giving/receiving of constructive criticism is obviously a favorite writing topic of mine, but I'll stop there before my followers are subjected to a 30 tweet lesson no one wanted on a Saturday ;)