Discussion -- 300 Word Challenge #4

Status
Not open for further replies.
After a lot of hard thought I settled on Alchemist, mosaix and TJ, then voted quickly before I changed my mind!

Cul - I may well have barked up the wrong tree with yours, but I still enjoyed it immensely - no reason at all to remove it from the shortlist!
 
Scott R. Forshaw said:
Okay, so I've just read all the stories, and refrained from looking at the discussion thread, so as not to be swayed. In the end it was such a hard decision to have to make - even making a shortlist was nigh on impossible ... it wasn't exactly short!

Quite amazingly, it finally boiled down to a two horse race between Springs and Reiver - the first two stories, surprisingly - and it was almost impossible to seperate the two.

After a quick cup of tea, a philly bagel, and a number of re-reads later, my decision was made: I chose Springs ... but both stories were absolutely fantastic, and had me entirely captivated from beginning to end. Well done, both of you! :)
Click to expand...


WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE OTHER TWO VOTES...? :eek::eek:
 
I think that by not reading the discussion Scott might have failed to discover that we have 3 votes each for the 300 word story.

Oh well, looks like Reiver missed out (and one other)
 
Oh dear, foolish me! :eek:
I did realise I was entitled to 3 votes ... I blame my absolute stupidity on a severe lack of sleep - damn insomnia!

Anyway, for those who missed out, I will be PM'ing a moderator with my other votes, so don't worry guys - you're votes are on the way!

Once again, sorry for my idiocy - I'm going to hide in a cupboard for a while!
 
Yay, big thanks to Perp Man for the vote, and Moonbat and Boneman for the mentions.
 
Scott R. Forshaw said:
Anyway, for those who missed out, I will be PM'ing a moderator with my other votes, so don't worry guys - you're votes are on the way!
Click to expand...
Sorry, but if they're heading somewhere, it won't be the poll.



The post to which the poll is attached contains the words,
Ursa major said:
Each member may vote for up to THREE stories, all votes to be cast at the same time

(The software won't allow for return visits for voting purposes, so if you don't use all three votes at once, you will lose the unused ones.)
Click to expand...
so:
a) they're not exactly hidden away;

b) they clearly state the consequences of not voting for three challenge entries at the same time: you don't get those votes back.​


​
 
I voted for Harebrain, also still being a noob and not reading enough to see the 3 vote option.

Boneman, Teresa, Alchemist, johnnyjet, Springs, Dermit also had excellant, excellant stories.

Thanks to AlcubierreWarp for the shortlisting.
 
I really must apologise to those who missed out on my votes, my momentary insanity is inexcusable. I read the rules - I read the stories - I re-read the stories - I forgot the rules ... damn!

It was the first time I'd voted in the 300, and have become so used to the 75, that my subconcious mind failed to remind my (extremely) tired conscious mind of the rules before voting.

I've been deliberating over whether or not to disclose who would have received my other two votes, because if they missed out by a single vote due to my failure to follow the guidelines, then I would feel responsible. However, on the other hand, the knowledge that they hadn't really lost - it was just some idiots fault for not casting his allocation of votes - they might not feel as hard done by.

So, after much consideration, I decided to come clean.

My votes - had I used them properly - would have gone to: Springs, Reiver, and Perp.

As I didn't use them properly: I'm so, so Sorry, Reiver and Perp, I hope you'll both forgive me. :eek:
 
Thanks for the mention short listing Moonbat, always good to make a short list; of course it's even better to get a vote to a great big thanks to Nixie.

An equally big thanks to Scott for the would have been a vote, the thought was there and it is greatly appreciated.
 
Tactical Loco, thanks for the praise!


There's a pithy quote attributed to Douglas Bader that goes something like this:

"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men."

I know that we are all wise men (and women) here but there's no room for justice in it, is there? I know I'm leaning on an open door, which will indubitably stay open if we don't close it, but it's not like Tactical and Scott are out to gain something by casting those two lost votes - quite the reverse, others will gain by them. Imagine if one of those lost votes meant the difference between someone winning the challenge and losing it... Winning the challenge (as everyone who's done it can tell you) is a wonderful feeling, way beyond normal competitions, because we're up against our peers and judged by our peers. The rules have been scrupulously observed by everyone throughout both challenges, as we all cherish what we've got, and it would be easy for an unscrupulous person to enter these challenges, enlist loads of their friends to register and vote, and win. That would, I hope, be spotted by the mods and quickly quashed, but it would sour the whole thing, beyond easy repair for a long time.

If it really is true the situation of software cannot allow their lost votes to be cast, I can think of an easy solution to it, but hesitate to bring it forward without consensus (ie the Mods). Is the rule cast in stone? Should natural justice be allowed a say this month, and then never again??? Anyone reading these threads now has a clearer picture, and it is a tad confusing when the 75 and 300 worders come up together, even though (as I said at the beginning) we are all wise men...
 
Boneman, I appreciate your feelings on this matter, but I hope that you can appreciate that a post like yours really puts the mods in an awkward position. We already tread a fine line between upholding the rules and maintaining the spirit of this forum without appearing to be heavy-handed or to be somehow lording it over the plebs. A large part of the reason that this forum is as successful and as damn well pleasant as it is is because every single one of the people that Brian has put in charge here is level-headed, sensible, and above all else fair.

The rules are clear. Scott even admitted to reading them, though ignorance is not an excuse in any case. I am almost certain that this is not the first time that a member has failed to use all of his or her votes, whether accidentally or on purpose. It may be the first month where that member has named those he would have voted for, which is not an ideal situation and which seems largely to have caused the hand-wringing that has occurred this time around. But should we return to those past months where this has occurred and hold a recount, to ensure that justice was done on those occasions? If a member posts a seventy-six word story 'accidentally', should we allow them to repost? If they are ten minutes late on the 23rd or 31st, should we allow them to post their story anyway?

The matter has been decided, in the most fair manner possible - by following the rules laid out at the start of every challenge and every poll, that every member is accountable to. The moderating team would appreciate it greatly if this was the end of the discussion on the topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
elvet November / December 100 word Anonymous Challenge 2024 Discussion Workshop 6
The Judge DISCUSSION THREAD -- November 2024 -- 75 Word Writing Challenge Writing Challenges 59
Daysman DISCUSSION THREAD -- October 2024 -- 75 Word Writing Challenge Writing Challenges 161
The Judge DISCUSSION THREAD -- 300 Word Writing Challenge #55 (October 2024) Writing Challenges 135
The Judge DISCUSSION THREAD -- September 2024 -- 75 Word Writing Challenge Writing Challenges 118

Similar threads


Back
Top