At what point do you become adequate enough to critique someones writing I wonder?
Is it once you have finally been published that you can say - well I have been published so now I can officially comment on someones work? If that theory stands then everyone who has self-published is really taking self liberties in critiquing because they didn't really earn the right but rather published the right themselves surely? But there are others who specialize in critiquing who have never published themselves, so how does that work? Should you really only ever comment if you have some kind of degree in these matters?
As always your thoughts appreciated :)