Discussing the Writing Challenges -- November and December 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting thought there HareBrain. I sense a contender.

For myself I can say that I never consider length of time a person has been posting when judging the stories. For me, and I suspect for nearly all, if not all, the other people who vote we're looking for that hook that makes the story memorable while fitting into the given guidelines, SF or F, and 75 words or fewer, which tell a story.

That said, there are a few for which I'm going to take a little more time just because they ordinarily post such excellent stuff.

:p(Just a hint, one of them plays dumb and squeaks.):p
 
R M Tobias said:
Though expressed as a percentage of the whole, that's surely a very narrow field.
Click to expand...


That was off the top of my head, and without going back to look. I might well have come up with many more examples if I made a habit of noting who had been here the longest when considering which story to vote for. As I don't, I can't tell you the ratio of newcomers to old-timers that have appeared on my short lists, let alone anyone else's.
 
Oh, I've considered newcomers a time or two, I think.


Then I usually have a short, "sweet" list within the first twenty or so stories. I may add a time or two to that as the challenge goes on, but I know what strikes me in what way and even what just goes over my head to instigate my full appreciation. Every story I've read in this challenge these nine months I've liked in ways, but the diamonds amongst the glass are what you look for, and what's diamond to me I can usually find within the first couple weeks if I look correctly. :)
 
Well, I've voted in every single one so far (and submitted to none - the words prose, for, toffee, write and can't apply), and my vote has always gone to the best story, IMAO.
I really don't care if the author has 10 posts or 5,000 - it has no bearing on where I cast my vote, and I'm not really sure I like the insinuation that it does...
 
Pyan's right here. Post count and seniority do not have bearing on whether or not a story should be voted on. It's the content of a story that matters. It's the one that stirs your emotions, fires your neurons off, the ones that cause a good laugh or some subtleties to it that provide a nice little twist. It's what the 75 tells you, not the info on the side outside the story. :)
 
It usually takes me three or four days to come up with an idea and rough out the story in my head, then another couple of hours to write and edit it. But a couple of months ago, the story came within minutes, and this month it's taken weeks.

And to add my voice to the voting thingy (never mind, coffee soon) I'd happily vote for a story from someone with a single post if I thought it was the best, and I'm pretty sure the same applies to everyone else here.
 
I have to agree with everyone else.

I think I'm one of the weird ones here who has a low post count and yet have been a member of Chrons for a long enough time to be considered an old timer. I've only just started taking part in the story writing and do it for the fun of the thing and to try to reignite the desire to write. This comes not just from taking part, but in reading the other entries and seeing how clever and fun they are.

When it comes to voting I hardly ever read the name of the person posting, and certainly not the length of time or number of posts. Once I've read the story I then note who did the writing, make a short list, then do another later in the month, and then start the hard, hard job of whittling down.

I think that the problem with this competition is the quality of it. Every entry new or old (mine excluded) is an excellent tale and choosing a final one is a terrible decision, because so many are good enough to win... for me at least it really is not a case of who is new or old, it's choosing the best of the best - when they are all the best!

And oh yes taste is subjective.
 
Well, getting a few votes encourages people who may need it in their writing career... just as long as getting no votes doesn't discourage others... and that has happened, where very good stories ended up w/zilch votes.
It also doesn't hurt to butter up some of the wonderful, talented, oldtimers... of course I would never, never do that...
 
In the early competitions I would come up with an idea fairly quickly, in the first few days, then write an entry in about half an hour, then post. But then I got annoyed with my posts having mistakes (at least one of them did) so now I take more time. I usually (this month for example) let the subject rattle round my head for a day or 7, by then I've usually had an idea that has hit me at some random point in the week, this month it came when I was walking to work in the morning. Then I sit and I write what I can, I usually don't care too much about the word count at first, and it will end up maybe twice as long as it should be. Then I whittle it down, all that takes about 30 mins. But nowadays (as oppposed to early on in the comp) I let the idea sit for a few days and edit it as best I can, so I put in probably 5-10 mins a day for the next week, then when I sick of reading the same thing over and over I post.
This month I had two ideas (actually my missus came up with one when I asked her what 'sacrifice' meant to her) but after writing that idea I didn't really like it, and I prefered my own (which she didn't understand) as I felt it was more sci-fi/fantasy.
So if we add that up (not included time for the idea to stew that has been about 83 minutes this month :)

And as for voting, I have only ever voted for the stories I like the best, I think I have a few favorite writers that I prefer and some that I don't like the style/substance of, but it has nowt to do with seniority, it's more to do with my personal preferences in story types. Boneman and Chopper are two that come to mind as my favorites, I think I've voted for them more than once, not because I like the people (I don't really know them, even though they are listed as my friends) but because their stories make me smile, or laugh, or go 'Wow!'
 
Last edited:
When it comes time to vote, Tobias, I read the entries in time order (oldest first) and judge purely on their 75 words. The only time the identity of the author affects my vote is when I skip over my own. (I'd be tempted to say that this last action sometimes saves me some embarrassment, but for the fact that that kind of talk attracts slaps; so I won't. ;):))


To do anything else would make this into a popularity contest, which wouldn't do me much good, as - entirely in jest - I've probably "insulted" all the long-standing members who post in this thread at one time or another.



By the way, when Karn says he considers "newcomers", he mean entries posted in the first few days on each challenge. ;):)
 
Do I class as an oldtimer? I think I've been here long enough! :D

And I've not received a vote yet, in what..... 5 attempts? So I must back up the people here saying that it's quality that counts and not how long you've stuck around. Either that or nobody likes me! Haha. :p
 
For what it's worth, RMT, I got 4 votes last time (very gratifying, thank y'all) and I'm in a similar boat to you. One member, one vote, means you get some skewed results at times. An excellent story, one which might be 20 members' second favourite, may get no votes at all.
 
R M Tobias said:
Though expressed as a percentage of the whole, that's surely a very narrow field.
Click to expand...
Eek! You mean I should have been producing stats showing the breakdown of votes for newbies versus old timers as well as everything else...??

Three points I can think of quickly, two from the figures, one from human nature.

First, there are more oldies here than newbies. Just taking November's figures there were 49 entrants, of whom 35 joined in 2009 or earlier, and only 14 are 2010 members. I'm not a statistician but I'm pretty sure this means it is more likely on a statistical basis that one of the oldies will win. Moreover, many of the 2010 newbies we've seen in earlier months have only entered once or twice, and so their chances of winning aren't as high cumulatively as someone who has entered every month.

Second, the story always trumps the story-teller. In November alchemist, who joined in September, got 4 votes. That was more than the total votes cast for Boneman, Mouse, HareBrain, me, Teresa and Parson ie 6 previous winners/tie-breakers. Sephiroth and chopper didn't enter, but of the 9 entrants on the "Hall of Fame" only Hoopy came in with more votes than alchemist. In this respect, I'd also mention Mag the Mighty. He failed to score last month but before that he had entered two Challenges and received 4 votes each time. As an average that was better than anyone, even HareBrain.

Third, human nature being what it is, it is inevitable that we favour some people more than others. If I dislike someone because of his postings elsewhere on the Chrons, I am unlikely to pay a great deal of attention to his work, or do so only grudgingly. (I say "I" but in fact I can't think of anyone to whom this would apply in my own case -- so this ought perhaps to read as "If one dislikes...") So on that basis newbies start at an advantage! But just because I like someone from his other postings doesn't mean I'll vote for a story if it doesn't gel with me for whatever reason -- and, in fact, I might not vote for a person I like so as to avoid any hint of favouritism.

As to whether getting more votes means one story is better than another, to my mind, no it doesn't mean that. In fact, I have never yet voted in first instance for the story which won, and I consider the votelessness of some entries to be astonishing. But that is the problem with only having one vote... ;)
 
R M Tobias said:
there isn't really a set of guidelines to determine 'what is quality' (maybe ask Robert Pirsig?)
Click to expand...

Of course that would be practically impossible. Judging anything is very subjective and will, inevitably, vary from person to person. I prefer SF to fantasy, prose to poetry, and 'hidden meanings' do nothing for me - nothing wrong with that. I'm sure that there are others here who hold the exact opposite view. :p

However, I haven't the slightest doubt that there isn't single member of the Chrons that includes 'post count' in their judging process.
 
J.

I would tend to disagree with your item three.

I was a strong advocate of a single vote system. However I didn't envisage 3000 entrants per month. Now I feel given the time it takes to get down to one it would be convenient to just get to a short list of 5 say and vote for all of those.

I mean none of us are getting older and given our collective impending doom do we really have the time to waste choosing between on tale or another based on the placement of a capital letter or full stop.

So I would be in favour of visiting the number of votes issue again for what it's worth.
 
Not sure I understand how choosing between fifth and sixth places on a voting list is any easier than choosing between first and second.

I've usually found it easier to pick a winner than to work out who to mention as "runners up". I say stick with one vote each (or at least, since "none of us are getting older", give it another thousand years). Re-visiting anything in this weather** is likely to be a problem anyway.

** topical for those not tropical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Karapace Revising and reasons for writing Writing Discussion 0
nixie Discussion Thread---December 2024---75 Word Writing Challenge. Writing Challenges 36
ryubysss a Reddit post discussing three threads of fantasy literature SFF Lounge 32
Toby Frost People on a forum discussing a disturbing TV programme Book Search 19
GOLLUM Gaiman Discussing Lovecraft Neil Gaiman 1

Similar threads


Back
Top