I just want to make the point that if too many people have to throw in their two cents on the creative process we get a story by committee without a cohesive focus. Which is bound to suck. I'd rather read the Dresden Files than a political statement.

Chess grandmasters have tried to test committees in competition. They would put three players in charge of one side of the board (white or black) and each one's individual ranking was between 2300 and 2350. Their opponent would be ranked around 2100. The committees never won a game. Clearly, each player was better individually than the opponent, but the process of homogenizing the strategy and execution resulted in a categorically weaker performance.

In other words, if you think what you're doing is good, then you're better off following your own ideas than listening to other, superior, writers. Do what you do.

The hardest thing for most people to remember, in my experience, is that writing is a creative activity. As such, it is wholly subjective regarding the 'right' or 'wrong' way to go about it, therefore success is measured only in the production and quality of your product.

Now, the quality of a given piece of art is largely in the eye of the beholder. But production and completion are objectively measurable.  Most of the advice I see on forums/blogs/message boards like this is offered in an attempt to encourage production and completion, more than anything else.

It's great to see how many different styles of production are represented here. One of my favorite authors talks about locking himself in a room, pulling eighteen hour days until he's done. Another fave has fifteen or twenty stories in production at once, and flits from one leaf to another until he's satisfied with the work on a given project, at which time he releases it.

Best summed up as above: Do what works for you. Just keep an open mind to the possibility that yours is not the best, or only way;-)