I'm thinking that it must have a yet-to-be-named item included within the story, in a fairly big way. e.g. a talking gun.
I was also thinking of perhaps a two week period to complete it, which seems generous.
Any one up for it?
I also am on the hook to provide a trigger for the next challenge, with the success of Apocalyptic Taco Mix, but I think I may wait until after the Holidays, particularly if this challenge will be thrown into the mix in these next few weeks. I haven't forgotten, though (and have a trigger in mind, FWIW, two actually - trying to decide between a word trigger and a photo one...)
Pat
quote:
Maybe? It's really hard for me to write sub-1000.
Well, theres the challenge. I was thinking this was different from the previous one because it was just flash fiction--I wasn't trying to steal your role as trigger for the next short story challenge.
As I have indicated, I will 'referee' the contest, provide the story trigger, as do the scoring. I WILL NOT BE WRITING A STORY OR VOTING MYSELF.
Rules.
1. The story must use the trigger as an integral, yet not necessarily pivotal point of the story-- so it must be more than just a mention. I will be nice, it won't be terribly esoteric.
2. Prior to the end of the two week period (and on a separate post) you will email me your story and I will post it with a number tag together with its title, but not an author tag. The authorship should therefore remian secret until the voting is complete.
3. When closing date has been reached and not before all participants will select five intro's and request (by email)full stories from me (so your intro needs to be good!. This means you will only need to read 5 stories. You are not to request more than 5 stories from me.
5. You will have a week to score the stories and will email me with the numbers of the pieces and the ranking you gave them (of 1-5 (five being the best) ) for each story.
6. Voting will be secret. You can't vote for yourself.
I will then post the the voting results (who voted for what) around the 22nd December. So a nice Christmas present if you win.
Any one seriously disagree?
This competition will only happen if we get a minimum of twelve people who wish to participate.
I am hoping to post the trigger this weekend. So sign up.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited November 30, 2007).]
Pat
If you wish to crit the story properly, you can--and once the voting is complete and the results are known you can then send the crit to the author, as at that point it will be revealed who wrote what.
I only want emailed to me the votes. I don't want crits emailed to me...then it would become a nightmare!
If anything is unclear I will happily clarify.
I am happy for you to provide the trigger if you want to...I just want it to be provided by someone who is not going to be entering the contest--to keep it fair. If you want to do so just respond to this post, saying that you would like to and we can agree on when to post.
One suggestion - you should arbitrarily decide who gets which 5 stories. The risk is that some of the total stories entered get read 10x and voted on, while others get read only once or twice. A huge benefit of challenges is receiving critiques on the full work. Since not everyone who enters returns full critiques (seems to me that there is at least a 10% non-crit rate even when people commit ahead of time) - it's helpful to have a critique as part of the requirement for voting. (Though some challenges run by doing the voting first, which is speedier, then receiving the crits after. Risk is the crits get dropped due to other priorities.)
Anyway - just some food for thought. I'm still a Maybe on this one.
Also remember to protect the author's e-pub rights and post no more than 13 lines to this or any public forum. Full texts should be emailed. If you referee, this is simple to do. We tripped a bit over ourselves w/the Apocalyptic Taco Mix Challenge last month.
If it makes it easier to manage, I don't think it's necessary to keep author's identity secret. That way we can send crits direct to the author and send votes to your good self.
Cheers,
Pat
Ok, so how about this.
I am keen that voting and therefore authorship remains anonymous and I have a work around that I think may solve the problem. I also wanted the stories selected on the basis of merit of the first 13, as would be the case in submissions.
How about each person selecting one of the intros and requesting me for the full version. I will then add three randomly selected stories and send them back. This should mean that everyone will get at least three crits back, and that would only happen if absolutely everyone chose the same intro.
We could make it a condition of voting that people should send crits back to me, with votes at the end of each crit. I will copy and paste these into an email for the author, which I will send when the voting process is complete. So you should find out how you did in the competition, plus get your feedback.
Better?
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 01, 2007).]
[This message has been edited by supraturtle (edited December 01, 2007).]
You could do a story about the sinking of a ship, have someone tortured using water. Have someone bathed in strange radiation. Have a space ship that looks like a bath, etc,etc.
I guess it needs to evident that the trigger has somehow been included in the story, you don't have to include any phrases etc. You can also be as creative as you want in how you interpret it.
I plan to choose something that has multiple meanings anyway, perhaps a word that is a verb as well as a noun. I want to ensure it works for all genres.
I wouldn't want to put you off, IB. Was there any other element of the rules that you would like changing? You said something was irritating.
After all I am just 'hosting' this, not participating, so I am open to all suggestions.
I'm working toward finishing my next WOTF entry, which is due in by the end of the month. I'm only about a third of the way into the rewrite, so I'm not sure I'll have an opportunity for both. There's is a little more payoff for that challenge.
The only day I have completely free is Suday. You'll notice that I'm rarely online on Sundays (That day is sworn to my children). So, depending on how fast I get my next WOTF entry done, I might join. I am usually up for the challenge--even if the work sucks--and am right at home with 1000 words.
PS - skadder, if you are not familiar with Liberty Hall, you may find it likeable. There is a weekly flash challenge (timed at 90 minutes), once-or-twice monthly there is a short story challenge (also trigger prompted), and a polish challenge (for the stories that were critiqued during the other two challenges). There are many other resources for writer, and it is a great enviroment.
You will have two weeks to complete the 1000 words.
Is that OK?
I was afraid to commit because I never seem to have time to sit down and write - maybe a deadline will force it.
2 weeks to write, 1 week to read?
I am confused about our obligations on the reading part - I see we are asked to just rank the stories, but others are referring to critiques. Which is it?
[This message has been edited by NoTimeToThink (edited December 01, 2007).]
Rules.
1. The story trigger must be evident within the story, however you may have interpreted it. I will be nice, it won't be terribly esoteric.
2. Prior to the end of the two week period (and on a separate post) you will email me your story and I will post it with a number tag together with its title, but not an author tag. The authorship should therefore remain secret until the voting is complete.
3. As soon as all intro's have been posted by me, or the closing date has been reached, participants will select ONE intro and request (by email) the full story from me (so your intro needs to be good!). I will also send three randomly selected stories.
5. You will have a week to score the stories and email me with the numbers of the pieces and the ranking you gave them (of 1-4 (four being the best) ) for each story together with your comment to the author. For your vote to be valid you must crit each story to some extent.
6. Voting will be secret. You can't vote for yourself. However when the results are revealed, all voting will be shown.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 01, 2007).]
So eleven if everyone agrees.
I have chosen the trigger.
Anymore?
annepin
halogen
KayTi (?)
Vanderbleek
TaleSpinner
jaycloomis
Igwiz
gobi13x
supraturtle
InarticulateBabbler (?)
NoTimeToThink
lehollis
oliverhouse
1. Write your story and email to me.
2. I will post your 13 lines anonymously on a different thread.
3. When all stories are in and have had the 13 lines posted, each participant will select the story they most want to read and email me to tell me.
4. I will send them the full version of that story, plus three randomly selected other stories. (I will ensure as even a distribution as possible and some people may be asked to crit an extra story to ensure all stories get a minimum of three crits.)
5. When you have critted the stories I sent you, you email the crits back to me, together with how you ranked them (1-4, 4 being the best). If you are critting 5 stories you can award two stories the same score.
6. I then tot up the scores and declare the winner(s). All crits will then be forwarded to the authors.
Clear as mud!
I'm in. However, I use MSWord.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited December 03, 2007).]
1) The person with the best hook, not necessarily the best story. If more people request a user from hook alone there is a good chance they will place just from getting 2-3 points from each person who reads it.
2) The person who's story is randomly given to people that like the story. 5 people may like Person Y's story, but 3 people may not, if Person Y's story is given to the 3 people that do not like it then Person Y will not place. Same idea, that Person B's story isn't liked by 8 people but the 3 people that receive it DO like the story.. Person B will probably place.
What if all stories were copied into a single word document and then each contributor can select 4 of the stories. They should still be required to critique those 4 stories before their points count. I'd prefer the ability to browse all stories and decide which ones I want to critique and rank (based on all of the stories written).
It's you're show, I'm just trying to be helpful, feel free to ignore me.
quote:
What if all stories were copied into a single word document and then each contributor can select 4 of the stories. They should still be required to critique those 4 stories before their points count. I'd prefer the ability to browse all stories and decide which ones I want to critique and rank (based on all of the stories written).
The trouble with that is that you may get no crits for your story whatsoever. If no-one likes it you will never know why. People requested a scoring system whereby everyone got some crits at least. Also it seemed onerous to crit 10 -13 pieces.
If enough people want the rules changed I am happy to do it.
Another version of scoring is to send your rankings based on the first 13 lines only (so we get a winner for best hook.) and then I send all stories to everyone. You make comments on each story, possibly not a full crit, but at least some comments about what worked and what didn't. Then you send back to me with your top three ranked.
I agree you may be unlucky if a few people don't like your story, but others would, but I guess that happens when you submit to a magazine or agent too.
If people want the change I am happy to do it.
As IB said it is meant to be competition of two parts.
) 10-12 stories. At least in this case the story length is max of 1k, it's still a lot.So, skadder's method of breaking it down seems fine to me. Interesting concept. I'm still a maybe, I have a few other writing projects on my plate this week...
quote:
The trouble with that is that you may get no crits for your story whatsoever. If no-one likes it you will never know why. People requested a scoring system whereby everyone got some crits at least. Also it seemed onerous to crit 10 -13 pieces.
Hrm.. yeah I see what you are saying,
Participants could still be randomly assigned someone to critique.
Each person is given a full word doc of all the stories along with the title of a story randomly assigned to them. They must critique their three favorites along with the assigned story. 4 crits total, and 3 ranks. They don't have to put the random story in their top 3 but they still have to critique it. That way everyone will get at least one crit.
Unless others step in to argue the case, I will keep the scoring as it is.
Please use the title of your story as the file name.
I would prefer an MS Word file(.doc). If you don't have MS Word please tell me and I will send to you in a different format.
In the email subject line put: Hatrack name: Story Title
At the top of your story please put:
Your Hatrack Name. (your email name means nothing!)
Story Title.
Words.
All of this is just to help keep track of everything. It is quite complicated!
quote:
We are doing almost the same thing, but with each participant selecting just one piece (based on the intro). That way there is more chance your story gets read and critted.
I agree they are similar. All I'm really trying to say is that the scoring really won't mean anything if people are randomly assigned stories. That's it, plain and simple.
When judging a contest you don't randomly assign judges a small sample of the stories. You give them all the stories so that there is no question. You can randomly assign them stories to crit, that's fine, but if they are randomly assigned stories as well then the competition really doesn't mean anything.
Almost like watching a swim match and having each judge randomly assigned to watching certain people, but not the entire group. It all boils down to what judge was assigned to what person.
This isn't a major competition, this isn't a big deal, it is just 10 people playing around, it is up to you to decide how it should be run and what system to score it with.
The reason I bring this up is I feel like competitions should focus on equality no matter how big or small they are. I really like the fact that you aren't putting peoples names on the stories and handling everything else, I just think it is important to make an observation about the judging process. AGAIN this isn't a big deal but if this was a actual competition it wouldn't work.
Everyone will get the chance to select the story they like best based on the intro's, so the playing field is equal there. More people will read your stuff if your intro is great, peoples taste will differ there, but good prose should shine through.
I guess we must strike a balance between participation and the amount of work being truly fair entails.
What can I say? I am dubious about changing the scoring system now the competition has started.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 03, 2007).]
Seems a lot simpler this way. Those that haven't won can move on to something else--instead of the murderous wait--and those that have survived the first-round can commense the nail-biting.
2) Critique the ones you like best. This is the intensive judging, and will determine which you like most.
Although, I, for one, will read and critique all that finish. It seems to me, those that weren't chosen need the help the most.
3) Vote. I suppose skadder, as the impartial person, will have any tie-breaker votes.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited December 03, 2007).]
quote:
I guess we must strike a balance between participation and the amount of work being truly fair entails.
Oh definitely. I know I only participated in a few crits of the last game, but I also read all of the stories. Anyone playing a game like this should be willing to, at the very least, read all of the submissions. If someone doesn't have time to read all of the submissions then they shouldn't be participating. I wouldn't jump in a 20k word competition just for that reason.
I think requiring people to crit the ones they want to rank is a GREAT idea and should be part of norm here. I also like the idea of making it so everyone has to critique one story at random because this would ensure that everyone will receive at least one critique.
The thing I feel strongly about is that the fairness of the game should always outweigh the ease for the judges. Judges, in any competition imaginable, must look at all the participants. That's just a plain fact.
There are two issues here and I think they are getting muddied together
1) fair play system
If it is going to be a competition it should follow some standard rule-set. Something that cannot be altered or geared towards an individual's favor (either by chance or direct involvement).
2) Ensuring everyone gets critiques
This is just as important as #1 but it is a separate issue. I think this should be incorporated into the system somehow but it should never remove the 'fair play' aspect of the game.
I like IB's idea, so I'd vote for his suggestion of two steps (first everyone votes for their top 5 based on the first 13 alone then those top 5 are handed out, read, and given a final rank). This is only marginally different from skadders idea, really it is just removing the random element.
There could be some way to incorporate requirement #2, for example, those that are placed in the top 5 should have to critique one of the bottom 5 and give pointers... maybe something like that?
Besides (as with the last competition) accepting the challenge, writing something that you finish, and getting decent input makes everyone a winner. These contests are mainly to get and keep people writing and finishing what they start.
[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited December 03, 2007).]
What about:
1.You select a story based on merit of the first 13 lines and email me.
2. I send you back that story, plus I select (e.g tell you the story numbers of) three other stories from the list. THESE FOUR STORIES MUST CRITIQUED.
3.I will also send you all the other stories for you to read. You then select the best of the rest and critique it. You will then rank the stories you have critiqued on a 1-5 scale.
This means everyone will get at least 3 crits. Everyone will get some votes. There is still an advantage for having best intro, but best story should be evident. It also means you only have to do 5 crits.
I will keep track of which stories you were obliged to crit and which you chose to crit. If you don't crit the one you were asked to crit but do another, the original story will get the vote you assigned.
OK?
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 03, 2007).]
quote:
And--to be honest--the critique is more important than winning. Winning lets you know that you're getting better, but critiquing shows you how to.
Yeah I agree, I'm really not trying to blow this out of proportion or cause aggravated headaches.
quote:
1.You select a story based on merit of the first 13 lines and email me.2. I send you back that story, plus I select (e.g tell you the story numbers of) three other stories from the list. THESE FOUR STORIES MUST CRITIQUED.
3.I will also send you all the other stories for you to read. You then select the best of the rest and critique it. You will then rank the stories you have critiqued on a 1-5 scale.
This means everyone will get at least 3 crits. Everyone will get some votes. There is still an advantage for having best intro, but best story should be evident. It also means you only have to do 5 crits.
Here is what I recommend, it is a very minor change.
quote:
1.You select a story based on merit of the first 13 lines and email me.2. I send you back that story, plus I select (e.g tell you the story numbers of) three other stories from the list. THESE FOUR STORIES MUST CRITIQUED.
3.I will also send you all the other stories for you to read.
4.You then pick from the entire list the top 4 stories and order them. You can critique any additional stories but the four stories in the email are required. You do not have to include the 3 random stories in your top 4, you do not have to include the story you picked in your top 4.
This means everyone will get at least 3 crits. Everyone will get some votes. There is still an advantage for having best intro, but best story should be evident. It also means you only have to do 5 crits.
I don't see the need in requiring the user to rank the 4 randomly assigned stories. Rank them against the 4 or against the entire batch? They will be critiqued so the receiver will know if the person liked or did not like them.
This would remove the element of critiquing from the element of decision. It would also ensure that people can choose to rank the 4 stories in the email if they realize that there was 4 better stories.
That's my advice, but it is only advice, I'm done causing problems in this thread 
As far as the voting goes, how can you possibly choose which are your favorites if you can't read the ones that hook you? skadder, you are making this exponentially harder on yourself than you realize. There is a 1000 word limit--and you can be sure most will be under or well under--I don't think it's too much to ask for everyone to read and critique them all. Vote on Best Hook. That's fine. But keeping everything random is a lot of trouble to afford someone to skip out on what is right.
quote:
I know I only participated in a few crits of the last game, but I also read all of the stories. Anyone playing a game like this should be willing to, at the very least, read all of the submissions. If someone doesn't have time to read all of the submissions then they shouldn't be participating. I wouldn't jump in a 20k word competition just for that reason.
BINGO! Anyone accepting the challenge, should accept the responsibilities. If someone doesn't have time to read and crit, don't enter. No one's twisting their arm. Everyone that finishes on time deserves a read and critique. Period. Last time was 500 to 5000 words--that's a little heavier--and we still got most of them done. 1000 words or less should be a cakewalk.
I don't think it's too much to ask folks to read 11,000 words. I know I'd do it.
Ultimately, skadder, it's your contest, and I'll be happy with whatever you decide.
[This message has been edited by annepin (edited December 03, 2007).]
Aren't the rules supposed to be set before the competition starts?
skadder - whatever you decide to do I will try to abide by, but I may need more than a week to read and critique more stories, so if you are changing requirements please keep that in mind.
Why not just send them all and let people vote like Annepin suggests? Should be real easy now.
I'm sure other people will crit as well so everyone is definitely going to get something out of this. Hell, like IB said, at 1,000 words a story that should be no problem.
1. Send me your vote for best intro.
2. I send you all the stories.
3. You must comment on all the stories-- doesn't need to be a line crit, but you must comment on what what worked and what didn't for each story-- a few sentences at least.
4. Send me back your comments for the 3 stories you think were best and rankings for those 3 stories--I don't want to be sorting 13 crits for 13 people (169 crits!). I will forward your comments on your top 3 to the appropriate authors who received a ranking score from you.
5. When results are revealed, people will be expected to forward the other comments to the authors involved (you will be expected, as mentioned, to have written comments on the other stories), as I will publish a list of who wrote what.
Most people will be able to make some comments on the three best stories within the scoring week-- the remaining 'crits' potentially could be done more leisurely--but people should feel obligated to do them. All scores and crits(Only 3) must be recieved by me within the scoring week and by the deadline, or the scores won't count.
THATS IT.
EVEN IF YOU ALL DECIDE TO PULL OUT AND MOVE TO A DIFFERENT CONTINENT, PERHAPS GIVE UP WRITING AND LEARN JAZZ SAXOPHONE--I AM NOT CHANGING THE ABOVE.
OK.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 04, 2007).]
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 04, 2007).]
Sorry, I cannot commit to writing thirteen useful crits. I can do five or six, but not thirteen.
It's not only time, there are some stories (excessive gore or bodily excretions for example) I simply refuse to read and if such are offered I do not want to feel obliged to read them.
So I guess I'll have to drop out.
Sorry for that,
Pat
[This message has been edited by jaycloomis (edited December 04, 2007).]
quote:
It's not only time, there are some stories (excessive gore or bodily excretions for example) I simply refuse to read and if such are offered I do not want to feel obliged to read them.
"I can't read this because I find it too disturbing" Is a critique. It is a short critique, but it still is one. I mean, if someone writes a story and receives nothing but comments like that, it would be just as useful.
Great idea though, and a good way to get people writing.
You are required to 'comment' on the stories only. A few sentences. I f you can't read one due to content--say so in your comment. It is a legitimate reason to not read it.
Also you are only required to do your top 3 for voting. The rest can be done a little more liesurely.
It would be a shame for you to leave the competition.
Adam
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 05, 2007).]
Cheers,
Pat
Jayson Merryfield
No more though. COMPETITION IS NOW CLOSED FOR APPLICATIONS.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 05, 2007).]
Too many projects this week.
Great idea and I want in on another one soon.
quote:
I'm going to try to write something by the deadline, but I have two projects so maybe not.
You were never in! Your post sounded very indefinite, and it ended with 'maybe not' so I never put you in. Sorry.
The next guy sounded more definite so I include him.
Next time.