This is not so much writing advice as it is personal experience, but it's about living as an upper limb amputee. If you have any questions for M, I can pass them along.

a guest post by Kaiden Alderling

Introduction

Ellipsus is a freemium writing and collaboration tool for writers, offering both free and paid versions. As a browser-based text editor, it has a distinct focus on anti-AI offerings and web-based publishing and collaboration. Users can use themes to change the colours and fonts displayed by the interface, and can easily export or copy text in multiple formats for online publishing. Fan writers will find the AO3 export tool especially useful. However, limitations to collaboration and tools for organising longer works make it a tough sell for power users. A lack of automated backups, reported server connection and sync issues, and unclear terms for allowed/prohibited content make for a murky user experience.

As a writer and poet, I think that the most important part of writing is the actual writing. Any platform that works for you? That’s the right one, and my first and foremost advice is to always back up your work, no matter what software you use.

For writers looking at trying out something new, I’ve taken a look at what’s going on with Ellipsus.

One of the web app’s biggest selling points? It’s easy to get started with and use for basic writing, and it’s dead simple to switch between devices with.

Pros and Cons

Positives

The company’s anti-AI ethos is attractive to authors concerned about scraping of private and publicly exposed documents for large language model (LLM) training.

Headquartered in Berlin, Germany, Ellipsus GmbH is a European company with European users, and has laid out its privacy policy to showcase its compliance with European GDPR and German data protection law, including an explicit promise to “never use your writing to train AI models.” Its hosting with Amazon Web Services is also provided through EU regions (see “Service providers we work with“).

According to the terms of service, a user’s “content” within the service refers not only to the user’s files, documents, and drafts, but also to comments and chat messages. Users explicitly own that content. Ellipsus explicitly promises not to use any of it for “training or developing machine learning or AI models of any kind” and this is echoed in the privacy policy.

“Snippets” sharing tool is a hit with writers who like to share quotes from their manuscripts and works-in-progress with an external audience, showcasing customisable, social-media-friendly designs (with additional customisation in the Plus version).

Theme customisation: users enjoy a similar level of customisation with the interface, mostly involving adjustments to to colours and fonts. Dark and light themes—among others—are available in the free version, and custom themes are available in the Plus plan.

Convenient export functionality allows users to download any individual document as a PDF, DocX, or Markdown file; or to copy it as HTML, Markdown, or Rich Text. Fan writers may appreciate the export functionality that allows linking an account directly to Archive of Our Own.

Browser-based text editor offers ease in switching between devices, making it a popular alternative to writing in Google Docs (also: unlike in Ellipsus, GDocs’s scroll bar makes me lose my place every time my thumb brushes the side of the screen). As a writing app, Ellipsus boasts a low barrier-to-entry compared to more privacy-focused tools that focus on encryption. Personally, I also enjoy writing with Markdown shortcuts enabled in Ellipsus, which allow for quick formatting when typing on mobile.

“Writing Insights” (Plus plan) tool uses “simple, programmed algorithms that run locally on your device”—the ability to highlight frequently used words and passive voice can be a useful tool while editing. These simple metrics are similar to word count or the “find and replace” tool in complexity; there’s zero indication that they use any sort of “AI” or LLM-based processing, and Ellipsus confirms that the feature does not use AI.

Queer-founded, with support from Gaingels Syndicate, a US-based venture capital firm that aims to support LGBTQ-friendly tech investment, as well as diversity and inclusion in hiring.

Introduction of a paid plan (“Ellipsus Plus“) indicates the potential for a sustainable business plan, and the “yours to keep” model provides a lifetime licence after 24 months of payments (currently $6 USD per month, with a final price of $144 USD). No credit card is required for the free 7-day trial.

Drawbacks

note: numbers in parenthesis are footnotes; see the end of the post for the notes!

No desktop version or offline version. Currently, the only way to access Ellipsus is through a browser on your computer or mobile device.

Lack of automated backups—or any simple way to regularly export all of the files in a user’s account—makes Ellipsus concerning as a primary place to write and store documents. With any platform, loss of data is always a possibility: always back up your work! (1)

Feature limitations:

Editing: A lack of track changes functionality (also known as selective merging, suggestions, or inline track changes) means that editors or beta readers need to leave comments on the work instead of being able to provide individual suggestions at a granular level. I also find it clunky to manage editing in the platform; writers need to create a separate “draft” to allow comments. Drafts can be merged, but doing so isn’t as intuitive or specific as track changes.

Writing: This becomes especially confusing when drafts are also used as a workaround for a lack of chapter/tab functionality, and a common criticism online is that the platform lags on documents with longer word counts. There is no support for tables, and nested lists often break upon import/export, even in Markdown. (2)

Collaboration: Commenters need their own Ellipsus accounts, so depending on how common Ellipsus already is in your own writing circles, it might not be the easiest platform to onboard beta readers to.

Version history: only 30 days are included with the free plan.

No encryption for documents, which might otherwise alleviate concerns about allowed content.

Security concerns: no multi-factor authentication is currently available for logging in, despite Ellipsus now accepting payments. (3)

Bug reports online include issues with syncing and loss of work (always click the sync button to ensure your work syncs), server connection issues, random movement through the document, keys sticking, and unexpected formatting changes to paragraph spacing and fonts. A ticketing system is available, but the best way to reach support is through the Discord server, which is very unfortunately very common with modern apps.

Unclear terms for allowed content: as a young platform, Ellipsus is largely untested when it comes to policing of user content within the platform. The terms of service assure that content written “privately within Ellipsus” isn’t policed, but some content is against the rules, namely plagiarism and planning/committing crimes (4), and that prohibited content is subject to reporting from readers who receive access to the document, as well as legal requests (keeping in mind Ellipsus’s European jurisdiction). Ellipsus also recognises the community’s concerns that the payment processor Stripe might “pressure” Ellipsus over “adult or NSFW content” and has responded that in the case of a “serious conflict with our values, user privacy, or the kinds of (lawful) writing our users create, we would evaluate alternatives. If necessary, we would migrate payment providers.” (5)(6) Please remember that I am not a lawyer, and that this summary is not legal advice.

Abrupt changes are always possible with any SaaS (software as a service), especially to the free version. Growth of the platform is imperative for a company with Ellipsus’s funding structure, based on both its venture capital backing (7) and its lifetime licence structure. It will require additional users to continue bringing in cash flow, and as with any company, it could shift focus from its current niche of fan writers and toward a larger potential userbase.

The opt-in tool Emboss, available as part of the Plus plan, appears to have been planned by the company from early on (8). The purpose of this tool is to provide evidence of human authorship by combining a number of metrics with the ability to provide a public link to past versions of the document (“selected version history snapshots“). While the tool doesn’t provide any kind of score or assessment as to whether the document was or was not human authored, I personally don’t think it was well-executed, and I was concerned when Ellipsus seemed to be suggesting that sharing Emboss links might provide a writer with a public shield against accusations of AI use. While this tool might be able to provide evidence of the evolution of a work to an editor or publisher through version history, it doesn’t seem to provide any more value than other tools with version control. (9)

Footnotes

The “Right to portability” section under the privacy policy specifies that users can request a “machine-readable export” which includes your writing.

One of the co-founders addressed the lack of some of these features in a reply to a document posted by both co-founders in June 2026.

The company updated the privacy policy by June 10, 2026 to indicate that full credit card numbers were not being stored by Ellipsus, but were handled by the payment processor. The co-founder responded to a user question on June 13, 2026 saying that multi-factor authentication/two-factor authentication would move to a planned feature, and this has been added as a “big priority” to the June 2026 document (item 35).

Item 28 in the June 2026 document elaborates that “NSFW content is not illegal” and “is permitted in Ellipsus” while users should look to the terms of service “and refer to your local laws for clarification.” The terms prohibit “Us[ing] our services to do anything illegal: Write about fictional or historical crime as much as you want—please don’t use our services to plan or commit any IRL illegal activity.” In the June 2026 document, illegal content is defined as subject to the user’s local law; Ellipsus claims that they “do not actively look at or police your documents” but elaborates that users sharing their documents do so at their own risk. “We don’t actively police public work, unless it’s reported to us/we receive a valid legal or DMCA request. (If so, we will handle that according to our policies and legal obligations).”

Item 26 in the June 2026 document.

Users are also concerned because of the reality that classification systems often include all queer content within the label “adult” and that “Several regions make it illegal to discuss, promote, or teach LGBTQ+ topics.”

Including Better Angle, Circle & Co Ventures, Common Magic, SpeedInvest, and Gaingels.

An argument for the Emboss human attribution tool is laid out in some early blog posts: The Watchmakers (2023) and The Distributors.

I am a firm believer in the nature of smut as literature. Not that smut can be literary, but that smut is inherently literary. Sexuality, sensuality, the expression of and relinquishing of control, pleasure, these are all parts of the sophont condition, and are always-already full of deep themes and politics. It is not a special category which is "just" about fuckin'; in fact this is why I don't like the word 'just' used in this way. It is dismissive of so much, a grammatical marker that the thing under discussion is not worth exploring further.

Nowhere, nowhere, is that more trivially, obviously disproven than the penultimate three chapters of Lagnia's Independent Establishment. You would have to be extremely motivated by a longstanding hatred of pornography to say otherwise.

I will offer my biases at the outset here. Lagnia is one of my closest friends. We say 'I love you' to each other. We understand how each other thinks. Fae is a deeply special sophont in my life. So I am, obviously, somewhat compromised here. I cannot give you an objective assessment of this story.

But I believe that the nature of a conflict of interest is only that it should be examined and disclosed, accounted for and compensated for, not that it should be automatic grounds for staying silent about something transcendental your bestie has done.

With that said, let us begin. This post contains some full-story spoilers for Independent Establishment, at least in terms of discussing themes that are only made explicit in the finale; I would recommend holding off for a while to experience the reveal organically, but I am not your warden. Make the decision that is right for you, even if it's not the 'correct' one.

Hello everyone! Some time ago, I reached out to Christian romance author Kellyn Roth, (https://kellynrothauthor.com) who often speaks on her own blog on boundaries in Christian romance among other things. I asked her to write a guest post for my blog on the increasingly common accusation that, "emotions/romances are porn for women". Not being myself a romance reader, I didn't feel like the most equipped person to address the subject.

Following is the post. I hope you'll enjoy, and any romance fans who follow me may wish to check out her books.

---

Hi everyone! I’m Kell, an author of historical women’s fiction and romance. I was so excited when Evelyn reached out to me about this topic because, frankly, it’s one I have a lot of thoughts on. Specifically, I want to talk about the accusation that “Romance novels are porn for women.” I’ve heard this phrase often in conservative circles. My immediate, gut-level reaction? A massive eye roll and a sigh on behalf of women (and romance-readers) everywhere. The idea that anything stimulating ... even if it is words on a page, and even if those words are clean ... is automatically "porn" bothers me. As someone who actually struggled with a porn/erotica addiction as a teen, I know the difference, and I'm done hearing it. Conflating a sweet story about human connection with the exploitation, cruelty, and soul-destruction of pornography (which I am deeply against, for reference) is theologically unsound. It is also just discouraging. In this day and age, are we really still sharing these Victorian-ish thoughts? Are we still believing that fiction is "turning women's heads" and making them hysterical? What era is this? It feels like another attempt to ruin something that women care about: romance, love, affection, being seen as special, and a meeting of the minds. The "Emotional Adultery" Fallacy

The core critique usually goes like this: “Romance novels evoke feelings that you should only have for your husband.” Let’s follow that logic for a second. If we read a mystery novel, are we stealing thoughts and feelings only meant for detectives? If we read an adventure story, are we robbing professional explorers of their adrenaline? Let’s take it into real life. If we have empathy for a friend—if they experience joy and we rejoice with them—are we wrong? By the standard of "exclusive emotions," all novels are wrong and all fiction leads to feelings we should not be experiencing. We experience empathy, excitement, and hope in platonic relationships all the time. Romance novels simply use those same human emotions to force us to open our hearts and examine our own beliefs about marriage, relationships, and even tough, unrelated topics, like the ones many authors are exploring in their novels. The "Addiction" Argument

Critics also claim that women get "hooked on emotional highs." Here is the truth: You can become "addicted" to everything. There is room for an unhealthy obsession with romance novels, sure. There is also room for an unhealthy obsession with throw pillows, Christmas ornaments, or golfing. We humans are great at obsessing! But equating all enjoyment to obsession is ridiculous. Why is a lack of self-control the fault of the romance novelist? Emotions are not bad. They are a way to process truth. They are a mirror into our heart condition. If we live aware lives, we can spend our time thinking through these things. And if we can’t do that? We can ask for accountability; we can pray; we can turn to God and to faithful mentors. We don’t need to ban the genre; we need to check our hearts. God is the Great Romancer

The desire for this kind of relationship must originate somewhere. When even God uses marriage as a way to describe the union of Christ and the Church, you know He doesn’t disapprove of the concept. God is the greatest Romancer! The idea that romance is only meant for women, and is therefore silly or dangerous, is wrong on two levels. First, it assumes men cannot enjoy a romance (though it's true most men will not, they are not universally incapable). Second, it implies that because something is written for women, it matters less. Romance is a genre primarily established by women. I believe it is the perfect genre for women writers to share Biblical truths about life and relationships—and not just within the “romantic relationship” category. Quality Control Matters