I wasn't planning to write a second part of this essay, but after getting some feedback, I believe it is necessary.

 I once heard a publisher talking about books and submissions and said that they received a lot of queries for "good books." "That isn't enough," he said. "They have to really excite me." A goal of the Authors' Guild is to publish all the good books, without trying to decide what is the best. 

Some thought that the Authors' Guild was simply a way to improve the quality of your book. It is, instead, intended to provide quality assurance for your book. The AG would be a publisher and would promote books through its site and email.

Some thought it would be a hybrid publisher. I can't speak to all hybrid publishers out there, but the AG would *NOT* sell its services. Any money it would make would be a percentage of sales (to cover operating expenses and possibly to compensate the senior editors).

Some who read my first article thought the senior members would wind up doing a lot of thankless work, reading the slush pile and offering suggestions for improvement for free. That was not the intent. Everyone who works for the Authors' Guild would be compensated for their effort by some combination of (1) priority in the promotion of their work (through the Guild's website & mailing list), (2) through editing or services, or (3) possibly money--or some combination.

Some people had the impression that the author's guild was a promise of success. It isn't. The Authors' Guild would not guarantee that any book would sell, but would at least make it easier to distinguish the good books from the bad. If you published with the Authors' Guild, you would be able to cite your acceptance as an accomplishment, something like qualifying for the Boston Marathon. To succeed, your story would need to reflect knowledge of grammar, story structure, POV, character arcs, tropes, dialogue, etc.