Hey, fellas, looks like a lot went down in the morning hours of Oz it seems... I wasn't aware JSimon was Kev from way back, although I guess it all makes a little more sense now. Thanks for commenting, mate, appreciated.
Firstly, no ill will intended. I personally don't think my comment was rude at all, it might've been the specificity of picking out your name -- which I try to avoid usually (picking names). The whole review was basically geared towards the conflict comments from peeps, I simply used your examples as they were the most prominent. This was in no way a jab to you, or anyone for that matter, I just wanted to explain my thoughts clearly. In fact, I think I wrote no offence intended somewhere as well, so I definitely wasn't trying to stir anything.
Not sure about the guru comments either, again, I personally think the comment was very tame and friendly, but can see how it comes across the way you perceived it. I didn't even finish my thought process there so it kind of ends very abruptly, again, it was just a post.
What I'm very unsure about is why I'm labelled immature if I try to defend my work, granted, this may not have been what you meant, but I think if a writer doesn't stand up for their work and listens blindly to everybody else but themselves, then... I don't know how to respond to that. In the end, a lot of people forget that if the writer likes their own work, however bad (very bad) or good (very good) it may be, why does it matter what anybody else thinks? Now, I'm not advocating being stubbornly thick-headed or looking moronic, but the line that exists, in my personal opinion, isn't easy to cross.
Reading over your examples, I don't think our methods of writing mesh well, Kev, which is totally fine. I think most conflict (as plot points) should be a result of the protag's questionable actions rather than an artificial occurrence in the story. If that makes sense? I don't feel like rambling on about this as I don't think we'll see eye to eye.
Look, I know what you mean about the story being static, and I had plenty of ideas to make it a little more active, but I stuck by my original intent. It was perfectly fine if peeps didn't dig it, and it was perfectly fine if they did as well. The point is, like Jeff said, stories don't have to follow the same cookie cutter approach to make them interesting. There's more than one way to tell a story and have it be engaging. That's what I wanted my comment to outline.
I don't think I was emotional either, maybe in the post it comes across like this, but I was literally grinning whilst writing it. The intent is lost because of a lack of voice tone which I obviously can't implement into my writing. Even this post might seem rude, but I assure it, it's all in good fun and I'm not trying to trash anybody.
In the end, it wasn't your thing, and it wasn't many people's 'thing' either, but on the other hand, some peeps enjoyed it, some people liked the 'organic' characters. This wasn't based on any bias either, it was all anonymous, I didn't tell anybody I wrote this script. Heck, I think this was only one of my OWC entries Jeff read to full in the past year or so -- so him jumping into this thread really isn't to smite people down, good intentions and all.
I think it makes for an interesting discussion, I hope I didn't scare you (or anybody else) off or anything. People are entitled to their own opinion, which is fine by me -- I tried to be extra nice this OWC too, so I definitely wasn't trying to be impolite or an ass. But there should be no need to jump to rash conclusions this quickly, if there's a problem, a PM works fine with me.