29 replies to this topic

[Nemitor]

any news on when we'll get our feedback for the last challenge?

Just wondering.

Edited by Nemitor, 25 May 2007 - 04:41 PM.

[Ben Walker]

Just re-raising the question....Feedback? Looks like we are 2 months behind....

[FltAdml. Wolf]

To be honest, I'm not sure if it's going to get done. It seems to me that this one issue keeps holding us up every month, and it's beginning to become a strain on the judges. Moreover, while some people find it helpful, we've had a great deal of drama with the comments, in the past, as people disagree with the opinions posted.

Does anyone have any suggestions about how we can work around the lag time? What about if we were to stop issuing the commentaries altogether?

[Toni]

Sir, I think, and don't by any means, mean this as the Gospel, but when people are promised something, and it's not delivered, then they tend to get bit upset.

Edited by Toni, 05 June 2007 - 07:24 PM.

[Ben Walker]

My personal viewpoint on this...

I enjoy writing the stories...and it's nice if I win or "runner up"....

But for me the real "payout" is the comments after.


If we don't want the judges to make a commentary....it feels arbitrary to me. I know it's not having judged once...and trying to decide between two very close stories can be very difficult. But...if they have gone through the process of determining one to be better than the other...they've already got a reason...

However, as this is all volunteer...perhaps we should put this back on the people writing.

Instead of 3 impartial judges...have everyone who enters votes on everyone elses stories.

Three rules for this though.
1. You can't vote on your own.
2. You vote for top 3...1st gets 4 points toward "winning" 2nd gets 2, 3rd gets 1. The totals are summed up to see who wins...
3. If you vote, you have to put in some comments on any story you vote on.

This way we have more feedback, and remove the effort from the judges.

Thoughts?

[Emirry]

I think that is a very good idea.
It makes it much more interactive.

[Toni]

I don't know, Ben.. some of what you say has merit, but seems like without regular judges, it would become more a popularity contest rather than a writing competition.

[W. A. Carrington]

I don't know, Ben.. some of what you say has merit, but seems like without regular judges, it would become more a popularity contest rather than a writing competition.

I agree, atleast with judges you have some quality control over the voting, and a means to address any concerns...but as for the lack of feedback, how about judges submitting their reveiws directly to a forum on theese boards that way they would be posted faster instead of the current method and provide a means of a little peer presure for those that tend to be late......

Edited by W. A. Carrington, 06 June 2007 - 08:41 PM.

[FltAdml. Wolf]

I agree, atleast with judges you have some quality control over the voting, and a means to address any concerns...but as for the lack of feedback, how about judges submitting their reveiws directly to a forum ontheese boards that way they would be posted faster instead of the current method and provide a means o a little peer presure for thos that tend to be late......

That might work.

[Toni]

I think that all 1st Place winners should be afforded the same considerations. It's disappointing when they are not.

[Ben Walker]

As for the popularity contest...


Part of the voting would be to do the write up of why you voted for who you did. Yes, it does allow for friends to vote for friends.

However, and I am not by any means accusing anyone of this, the judges aren't immune to that either...


Accepting the above as a negative, the positive would be more feedback.


Soo...along these lines...why not have a popular vote with feedback...and an "unbiased" vote from the judges...who aren't required to provide feedback.


Also, Toni, what do you mean?

I think that all 1st Place winners should be afforded the same considerations.

[Toni]

Ben Walker Posted Today, 08:39 AM
Also, Toni, what do you mean?

I mean that until this challenge, the 1st Place winners were invited to judge the next challenge, had it announced in the news, and given a banner. I understand why *some* of it was overlooked, as Admiral Wolf has been out of town a lot and I can't, and won't, fault him for that. The rest of what was overlooked, I'll chalk up to experience, and let it go.

I entered this past challenge because I don't hold grudges long, found the theme intriguing, and because I felt the urge to get back into entering. I can't say that I haven't felt that it may have been a mistake to try to mend fences after being snubbed, but it made me a better person for having swallowed my pride to do it, and gave me comfort in knowing that I tried.

But to be honest, Ben, in spite of that and some problems I experienced with feedback last fall, I still think that we have the most "Unbiased" regular judges possible when it comes to judging our work fairly. I have served under all three of their commands, and believe me, I know first hand that they don't cut anyone any slack.

Actually, the best feedback any of us can get is the feedback we can give ourselves. We are all writers, and know instinctively what made our stories work, or not work - what we did wrong, what we did right -according to our own individual styles. If we can't look at our work objectively, then how can we expect anyone else to do it?

The judges provide us a service by giving us the opportunity to showcase our best efforts, and I'll defend their right to run the competition according to the time they have allotted to spend on doing so.

Edited by Toni, 07 June 2007 - 08:37 AM.

[Ben Walker]

Toni,

You missed the point I was trying to make...

I would agree that the judges are all very impartial and unbiased.

I was trying to say that the people who would vote on the stories would be equally unbiased, as I feel that most people here are.

(Was meant as a compliment to everyone in UFOP...not a denigration of our judges..


And I understand your points about self-review...but what I feel works may not work for others...

[David Cody]

My thought is knowing Rocar and the rest do have to juggle a lot of stuff both here and in RL, it does take a lot of work to formulate results and provide feedback.

There's a lot here that does have merit, and I think everyone's opinions here matter. Would a compromise be allow the Judges to maintain quality control and the function of voting, and let the feedback be posted directly to the Writing Challenge forum?

Just thinking along the lines of streamlining... keep the judging as it is (since it's proven to be tried and true and works), but instead of gathering all the feedback first before posting it, we just allow those to post it.

Thoughts?

[Toni]

Ben Walker Posted Today, 08:39 AM
Also, Toni, what do you mean?

Ben, I don't think I missed your point at all. You asked and I told you.
On the rest, I was simply expressing my opinion. That's okay isn't it?

Ben Walker Posted Today, 08:39 AM
And I understand your points about self-review...but what I feel works may not work for others...

My point exactly, Ben.

Edited by Toni, 07 June 2007 - 06:28 PM.

[Stephen]

I have to agree with something Ben said earlier, about wanting feedback. I like writing the stories, it's a good exercise for me. I think I did well, but didn't win. Without feedback of any kind, I was curious about the fairness of the voting. There's no way to tell if my stories were even seriously considered. I'm not faulting anyone at all, believe me, but I just sent the stories according to the rules, and then nothing.

I know I'm a good writer. I don't need to be told that. But I do like and enjoy serious criticism, and if my stories didn't merit a top place in the competition, I want to know specifically why they didn't. Feedback would make me a better writer, and I'd see where I didn't quite measure up. For me, that's more important than winning a competition.

I was disappointed that not a word was spoken about anything I submitted.

As to a fairer and more efficient plan, I like the idea of having two sets of voters, the normal judges as we have them now, and the general membership of UFoP. But I think that any vote would require a comment, mandatory in the forum. That's the fairest way I know.

[W. A. Carrington]

Being a judge in the last contest and having to judge the entries I too have to juggle RL but found time to submit my feedback as directed for further transmittal to the respective authors. Its unfortunate that you all had to wait this long. For this I am truly sorry.

Edited by W. A. Carrington, 07 June 2007 - 07:27 PM.

[FltAdml. Wolf]

The only caveat to submitting opinions directly is that there may be times when reviews are too pointed. There have been a few incidences where judges have forgotten to include the "constructive" part of the criticism, and the other judges have asked them to refactor the opinion so that it's of use to the participant. If the reviews were posted directly, we'd lose that opportunity to edit the critiques before they go out. But, on the other hand, it may be worth it just to get those critiques out there in a timely fashion.

As far as this last round goes, I will be posting the winner on the website, and sending out banners and such hopefully this weekend. It's, unfortunately, a very time-consuming process to update everything that needs to be updated for the challenges, and sometimes when I have a lot on my plate it's hard to get the motivation to do specific things :-\

[Toni]

I understand about the banner and news totally, Admiral, and know what a generous load you carry.

[Toni]

Challenger Ending Date: Sat. June 9th
Nothing in life is perfect, and as the old saying goes, "If you don't use it, you lose it."
Do we really want to do that?