a story is generally assumed to be a finished piece when it's posted....In a way the relationship between the writer and the people who respond to the meta replaces the beta process.

Huh. That's a good point and I hadn't thought of it that way before. that is, I'm aware that the two types of writing generate very different types of feedback - we're generally expecting or hoping for in-depth conversation from meta as opposed to fics. But that may also be part of the reason that fanfiction isn't as satisfying to me as a writer. Whereas comments to a meta may very well inspire another meta; and replies may in themselves become "metasplurges" of their own. (A term I'm borrowing from the lovely lanoyee.)

OTOH, I find for myself I've been very anxious (read: terrified) when I've posted meta here on my journal - not short off the cuff posts like this but the longer ones (as for The Big Damn Love Fest). I wanted them to be as good as possible, to be readable and accessible, to strike an emotional chord; any of the things I would want a story to do. So far I've been extremely gratified by the responses, but I have no idea what effect it will have until the comments come in.

I still think of myself as a storyteller, but using nonfiction rather than fiction, so there's an art and a craft to it. Are we perhaps unintentionally "downgrading" the art that it requires? Does it depend on what the writer wants to achieve and what style they use to do it? Is it a matter of confidence in one's audience/flist, or rather experience in the fandom (having developed a "network" so to speak?)