My local football team, the Carolina Panthers, lost in the Super Bowl game yesterday, but it was a close contest. The city is now congratulating themselves with the idea that, even though it was a loss, it was a good loss.

This reminds me of the "good rejection letter." Most magazine editors are swamped with submissions, and when they don't want to buy your story, they send back a curt form-letter. This saves the editor time, and gets the writer his answer a bit quicker. It is not considered impolite, and the writer ought not to read too much into the impersonal nature of such a response.

Occasionally, an editor will take a few moments to write the author a personal rejection letter. Perhaps the editor liked the story, but just not enough to buy it, and hopes to encourage the writer and let him know it was a close decision. Sometimes the editor will point out a problem in the story, or suggest a more suitable market. Any sort of message from the editor that lets you know the editor saw your submission and took notice is a good thing. This is the oxymoronic good rejection.

But a rejection is a rejection, and I'd normally rather have a speedy form-letter "no" than a personalized "almost" that takes six months to receive. Beginning writers like the "good rejection" because it tells them that they are getting close to a sale. More seasoned veterans of the writing trade don't need their egos stroked nearly as much and just want an answer quickly, so they can get the story back in the mail to the next market.

Just like in the football world, there's always next year.