Quoted from Mr. Blonde Probably until late on Thursday. Give you guys as much time as possible to review, but still allow me time to make the brackets for the subsequent round.

Perfect - that's plenty

Quoted from eldave1 Perfect - that's plenty

For now, it is. Just wait 'til you see what I've got planned for you guys over the next four weeks... =)

Firstly, I have to say that I'm a little bummed that my opponent did not post a script for the challenge. I would have liked to participate in the first round.

Secondly, should entrants be critiquing scripts on the script page? It might be too late to make a decision on that. The reason I bring this up is because there is an "influence" factor. It's the reason why the Blacklist allows hidden scores. Corporations use influencers to pose as civilians when selling products because they understand this phenomenon.

Reading through the scripts, I've encountered some that I would consider "weak" that are garnering praise. Also, there was one that was being thrown under the bus that I thought was one of the stronger offerings.

I realize that it's subjective, but I can't help but think (especially since there doesn't seem to be any contradicting critiques) that the "influence factor" is in full swing.

Quoted from RJP Firstly, I have to say that I'm a little bummed that my opponent did not post a script for the challenge. I would have liked to participate in the first round. Secondly, should entrants be critiquing scripts on the script page? It might be too late to make a decision on that. The reason I bring this up is because there is an "influence" factor. It's the reason why the Blacklist allows hidden scores. Corporations use influencers to pose as civilians when selling products because they understand this phenomenon. Reading through the scripts, I've encountered some that I would consider "weak" that are garnering praise. Also, there was one that was being thrown under the bus that I thought was one of the stronger offerings. I realize that it's subjective, but I can't help but think (especially since there doesn't seem to be any contradicting critiques) that the "influence factor" is in full swing.

This is a very valid point... and I agree. But what can be done about it? Is there a solution?

It would be great if somehow the critiques could be sent in blind in a separate file. This would make for some interesting reads instead of seeing most people just agreeing with the majority.

Quoted from RJP Firstly, I have to say that I'm a little bummed that my opponent did not post a script for the challenge. I would have liked to participate in the first round. Secondly, should entrants be critiquing scripts on the script page? It might be too late to make a decision on that. The reason I bring this up is because there is an "influence" factor. It's the reason why the Blacklist allows hidden scores. Corporations use influencers to pose as civilians when selling products because they understand this phenomenon. Reading through the scripts, I've encountered some that I would consider "weak" that are garnering praise. Also, there was one that was being thrown under the bus that I thought was one of the stronger offerings. I realize that it's subjective, but I can't help but think (especially since there doesn't seem to be any contradicting critiques) that the "influence factor" is in full swing.

You make a valid point, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that bolded statement. You simply disagree with the majority, which is fine and not necessarily an issue, IMO. I haven't even looked at most of the thread comments before commenting. Then again, I can only speak for myself.

Personally, I've seen a lot of variation in the feedback, although blind critiques would be cool next time around. As has been said already, may be too late in that regard.

I think it's fine as is.  It's worked pretty well for other OWCs.

Quoted from ReaperCreeper You make a valid point, but there's nothing inherently wrong with that bolded statement. You simply disagree with the majority, which is fine and not necessarily issue, IMO. I haven't even looked at most of the thread comments before commenting. Then again, I can only speak for myself. Personally, I've seen a lot of variation in the feedback, although blind critiques would be cool next time around. As has been said already, may be too late in that regard.

My point is that I might not be disagreeing with the majority. That's how influencing works. The majority of voters may very well have thought that script was weak. But after 1 or 2 respected members give it a good review, someone who didn't like it is far less likely to post their opinion. And believe it or not, there will be people who change their minds based on the opinions of others.

Years ago when I was making indie computer games, you needed your game to be voted-in to be accepted onto Steam (distribution network). They used a platform called "green light" and you would post gameplay videos and people would give a yes of no. Anyways, what would happen is that you would get weeks and weeks of positive reviews until 1 GUY says something horrible about your project. You can guess what happens after that-- another guy, then another guy, then another guy. You'd be surprised how strongly people tend to follow others. Steam thankfully would allow you to remove unwanted reviews. Yes, obviously it manipulates opinions in the other way, but who wouldn't...and guess what happens? Months of only positive reviews.

From first hand experience I know how strong this can be. What can be done? Probably nothing in the first round, but people could agree to stop doing it in subsequent rounds. Doesn't matter either way for me. It won't effect my vote.

where do we read the scripts?

Because this is head to head, I think comparisons between the two scripts are justified and actually needed. Otherwise this is just a bunch of mini OWCs all thrown into one. Nothing wrong with that, but we lose the uniqueness of the brackets.

@RJP - let's hope that critiquing doesn't equal voting.

We don't review in pairs as they weren't posted in pairs. Maybe critique would be different if we read one after another or were cornered to make a choice.

But I hear you. We sometimes parrot each other. It's in human nature, and I read several times it's been proven by some studies. I can see it on my own example - I never bring down a script if it's highly praised just not to walk over someone's parade, but rather try to sound impartial.

Isiah - the pairs and the criteria are here - http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-tournament/m-1521470272/

Click on the script title and it'll open the scripts page where you can leave comments, click on the script title on this page and it will open the script as a pdf for you.

Ah cool that’s better.  It would’ve been fine if the parameter was in with each script but the pairing is great. Now I can start reading as I know exactly what the script is meant to be about

Everyone, I just need to make a quick announcement. When it comes to the polls, make sure you put a vote in for your own script. Seeing as we can't see the names of people who vote (only the last person to), there's no fair way I can think of to fairly keep track, except to take one vote off for each participant (the vote for themselves). I hope this seems fair to everybody, but I honestly don't know of another way that's guaranteed to work (and even this isn't guaranteed).

In addition to that, I will also act as tiebreaker. I haven't read the scripts or any of the script notes (except one. Full disclosure) and I don't actually remember off the top of my head who wrote what script. I hope this all seems fair and makes sense to everyone. Thank you.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Everyone, I just need to make a quick announcement. When it comes to the polls, make sure you put a vote in for your own script. Seeing as we can't see the names of people who vote (only the last person to), there's no fair way I can think of to fairly keep track, except to take one vote off for each participant (the vote for themselves). I hope this seems fair to everybody, but I honestly don't know of another way that's guaranteed to work (and even this isn't guaranteed). In addition to that, I will also act as tiebreaker. I haven't read the scripts or any of the script notes (except one. Full disclosure) and I don't actually remember off the top of my head who wrote what script. I hope this all seems fair and makes sense to everyone. Thank you.

Wouldn't voting for ourselves right off the bat break the anonymity? Perhaps that should be the absolute LAST thing we do... I'd clarify that, assuming we're on the same page!