Allow negatives off, but writing history word count still turns negative

Scrivener
,
1

I have my project set to not allow negatives in the settings, but today I opened my writing history for the project and found that today was negative. My session at the tops shows positive for today (it resets every midnight), but the writing history shows negative for today. The only thing I can think is the that the “Allow negative” isn’t working for the writing history. This is a project file that has first draft writing & revising happening all at once (it’s an anthology, it has multiple stories all at various stages at once). I’ve been purposely doing my revising first each day to keep it from killing my word count for the day, but apparently even that isn’t working. I don’t care rather I revised words out of some documents, I just need my count for the new words added to the draft each day.

The only work around I can think of for this bug is to move any documents I revise out of the draft folder while revising them and then put them back where they belong when I’m done, because then their changes don’t count against the draft count (I ignore the other count anyway). But then any new words added during revision won’t count either.

Is there any way to go in and manually change the writing history to fix problems like this in it? Where is it stored inside the .scriv project file/folder thing?

2

The setting you are referring to is very specific to the Session Goal, located as it is within that options tab.

Writing history in general records the changes in your project’s statistics, not your session activity (that would not be reliable for several reasons). It compares the current word/char counts with the previous, and presents the difference to you. It would not be logical to print “+342 words” if the draft went from 120k to 108k words.

So ultimately this is not a bug, it is working precisely as intended.

The only work around I can think of for this bug is to move any documents I revise out of the draft folder while revising them…

I don’t think that would work anyway. Again it looks at the overall counts at the end of the day (or when the panel is opened) and records the differences, it does not track what you do during the day to get to that point.

Is there any way to go in and manually change the writing history to fix problems like this in it? Where is it stored inside the .scriv project file/folder thing?

Sure, it’s a relatively simple file to edit, found in the Files subfolder, as ‘writing.history’. Honestly it might be easier to just keep your own spreadsheet for this though.

3

That is your opinion. I disagree. Having it tell me how many new words I added on any given day is perfectly logical. Though really, “logical” has nothing to do with it; it’s a matter of what goals a person has. My goals have nothing to do with overall length of all the stories combined, and everything to do with making sure I’m typing new words on at least 1 story daily. Rather I revised out more words from another story is meaningless; the two are separate stories so it’s illogical to count the removed words of one against the added words of the other.

I don’t think that would work anyway.

Actually, it works just fine. Better than fine really. I just made a “cut words” folder outside of my draft folder. I cut & paste words I don’t need anymore into a new doc, then move that doc to the folder and the history remains the same as if the doc was in the draft folder.

Try it for yourself if you like.

It “works” in reverse too: add a doc outside your draft, paste in as many words was you like, and move it to your draft folder. Your writing history won’t change. How Scriv is getting the writing history numbers, I’m not totally sure, but just simply saving the draft word count and running basic +/- ain’t it.

In some ways, this “cut words folder” method works even better than what I was saying at first. Because this allows me to do the revision at any time. I don’t have to do it first. In fact, if the first thing I do for the day is cut/move a large number of words, it messes up the session count (if set to don’t go neg) so it’s better to get some new words first. Not a bad thing really.

Sure, it’s a relatively simple file to edit, found in the Files subfolder, as ‘writing.history’

What edits a .history file? I’ve never even heard of that file type before.

Honestly it might be easier to just keep your own spreadsheet for this though.

Doubtful, since I would never remember to update it. Part of the point of using Scriv is to not need to waste time doing such things manually, or brain power on trying to remember them. Because I won’t. I have severe memory loss problems, I’m only slightly less forgetful than Dory. My own brother compares me to a goldfish (ironically of course, they have better memories than people think & me). I have to always clarify “I don’t remember that” is not code for “that didn’t happen” with people that don’t know me, and that I’m being overly literal with my words.

4

What edits a .history file? I’ve never even heard of that file type before.

It’s a plain-text file, anything like TextEdit in plain-text mode will suffice.

As to the rest, I don’t really understand the debate. I was merely explaining how the tool is designed to work, and that it is working properly within the logic that it is programmed to work, as a technical statement. Opinions have very little to do with that.

Actually, it works just fine. Better than fine really. I just made a “cut words” folder outside of my draft folder. I cut & paste words I don’t need anymore into a new doc, then move that doc to the folder and the history remains the same as if the doc was in the draft folder.

Well okay, there does seem to be a little tracking of where you initially edit the text, in further exploration. So yes, what you described here should be avoiding the main issue you described.

It is still something separate from session goal settings though. That it tracks where the editing events take place is something separate, but good to know.

5

This sounds like you’re trying to be dismissive and insulating by implying I’m illogical. And frankly, I don’t understand the need for it. Functioning as designed is not the same thing as functioning logically; it’s rather easy to make software that functions as designed that makes no sense to a given user (several mods for some games I play spring to mind; turning Fallout 4 deathclaws into Thomas the train certainly isn’t logical, but does function as the mod author designed it to).

My main goal in replying to you was to help you by pointing out the parts where you were incorrect about how Scriv’s writing history works. Because moving a doc in & out of the Draft folder does not update the history. And bug or no, I like that ‘feature’

And finally, I was not trying to debate you in the sense that I was trying to prove you wrong and criticize your use case. Because I was not trying to do either. I was trying to explain my own use case, as that can lead to suggestions for future features when people are open-minded.

6

I’d advise taking a step back and reading what I wrote (all of it) as a flat description of a process, rather than a personal attack on you that is laced with emotion and invective. When someone says, “no, it isn’t designed to use this setting, and it wouldn’t fit into the designed logic to do so”, that is not a scathing insult that implies you are being illogical, and that opinions are not valid. It just means, “it isn’t designed to use this setting, and it wouldn’t fit into the designed logic to do so”.

Repeat reading that, in the driest tone you can imagine, like a dull text book that is describing physics. That is all that is happening here, from my end anyway.

3 Likes
10

Exactly, you’ve missed the entire point of my reply to you. Hence why I asked if you aren’t a native English speaker because this degree of communication breakdown is strongly reminding me of conversations I’ve had with others that were not.

I never said I had been attacked; I said you came off as dismissive. If you’re not being dismissive, then maybe you’re just being dense? Idk.

except I was referring to (and made this as obvious as I could by quoting)

which is an opinion. One which I explained why I disagree with. Though said explanation seems to have entirely fallen on deaf ears because you just keep repeating “it is working as we designed it to” when I moved entirely past that point before ever making said reply.

I could give you the exact same advice because you seem convinced I’m being hostile (even though I already told you I wasn’t debating or arguing with you), instead of considering that you’ve misunderstood.

11

I think it’s time to put this thread on pause for a bit. Nothing helpful is happening here.

3 Likes
12

True. I’m trying to explain my use case behind a feature suggestion, but I might as well be swearing in Chinese for all the good it’s done to take the time to share my thoughts; reminds me of conversations I’ve had with co-workers who were from & living in India at the time, and seems like more of a language barrier than I’ve had with in-person co-workers who only spoke spanish (through being in person and knowing there’s a language barrier actually helps it be less of impediment to effective communication).

Oh well. Have a good one kewms.

13

As @AmberV pointed out, you made a bug report, not a feature suggestion:

The feature is behaving as intended: not a bug. He then went on to explain why it works the way it does.

Beyond that, I’m not sure what response you’re expecting.

14

All of that only applies to the first post of this thread (maybe you could include #2 at most? Idk, ask AmberV, it’s his post). This is no longer a bug report, and it hasn’t been since AmberV himself changed that; why on earth would I expect him to continue to treat it as such? I haven’t been treating it as a bug report since before I made #3 (my reply to AmberV).

The response I was expecting was a discussion around this (and/or similar) use case/s and ways Scriv can support it, including with possible new setting/s. Because (as I explained) I don’t see anything but a clunky work around (“cut words” folder) to support this workflow.