A thing that no one told me about being an author and that I've never seen brought up, but is very useful to know, is how the copy-editing process works.

Copy editors are wonderful people who save authors from looking stupid in a 1000 different ways. Be very thankful for them. BUT: they apply the same standards to every book, and they just don't know your book the way you do.

So it is very important, if you ever find yourself going through a copy editing process, to know your own voice. You have to know what you want the language of the book to sound like very confidently.

Because sometimes the correct thing, which the copyeditor very correctly did, changes the voice in a very subtle way and suddenly it doesn't sound like you anymore. And the thing that sounds like you might be better for this book, even if it is technically incorrect

It's a constant balancing act. How much am I willing to bend the rules of grammar to make sure my voice is still there? And when am I just being stubborn because I fucked up a simple grammar thing and I'm embarrassed?

There's often no right or wrong answer (or there is one, and your copyeditor has it, but it might not be right for you), so a lot of it is just learning to be confident in your own voice, and protecting that voice when necessary, while allowing corrections when they help.

For instance I've spelled copyeditor three different ways in one thread, and that's exactly the kind of thing it would be helpful to have a copyeditor to correct.

Anyway, one guideline I like to go to is: Does this correction make the text more clear? Does it make the experience better for the reader? If so, worth keeping. If not, might be worth leaving the original text to preserve your voice. But this is almost never clear cut