Super Singles has gone from the least reads to the most now, which in reality, really isn't fair or very cool, IMO.

Minor update, guys. Don has said that the voting E-mail will go out this weekend (unspecified day, thus far) then the writers will be revealed 2-3 days afterwards.

Good... we've had two people, in the very least, bottle it this OWC and reveal themselves. The other guy was Dan C. He even sent me a fishing message, mentioning that I hadn't read his yet. I ignored it.

I've put a lot of thought into why writers do this... and it comes down to fear. It doesn't have anything to do with reads or even the voting and winning the mug. It's fear of having their ego bruised in public. Doesn't matter what the truth of the matter really is. All that counts is what the truth appears to be... even when nobody really believes it.

I haven't participated in the reading this time around. Only read a few a commented only on one. This is a first for me in 10 years!!!

It has been a very civilized one though, which is good. Sometimes these OWCs turn into roadhouse brawls.

Looking forward to see who all the writers are.

Quoted from Dreamscale Super Singles has gone from the least reads to the most now, which in reality, really isn't fair or very cool, IMO.

Cool or not - it hasn't had the most reads. It has had 37 replies. From my quick count, 19 reads. The rest of the posts were on different subjects. So in terms of unique reads and comments - it's at the mid to bottom third. (Sorry, it's the CPA in me - some habits are hard to break).

Other observations:

- I would have DQ'd the script regardless if it was separated from the others or not. I viewed the page count as a hard guideline.

- Yes, it did get less reads from the way it was categorized.

- I'm quite sure that Don doesn't read all scripts for compliance. So if others did not comply (e.g., nu Superhero, not a comedy, etc.) than that would not be discovered until each reader read. The page count is strictly an objective, obvious compliance issue. It is or it isn't. I believe that is why in this OWC, unlike others, the rules issue was pointed out up front.

- I took Mark's note as - he already knew the script was dead from a rules perspective - but would still like a fair share of reads given that he had read the others.

I have no idea whether this is a fair request or not, but I read and commented out of camaraderie with a fellow writer. The contest is not about a mug. It is about providing motivation to write a short, get constructive feedback to improve that short so that perhaps somewhere down the line improvements can be made to allow it to succeed somewhere outside the parameters of the OWC.

My comments were not tempered anymore than they would have been had I read an anonymous one. Specifically, because I am going to know sooner or later who all the authors are anyway and I would not want to be a dick reviewer before I knew their name or after I knew their name.

- I believe that if anyone  reveals them self  before the voting is done, the script should be DQ'd. The very essence of the contest is anonymity.  A reveal violates that.  

Obama, out.

Quoted from eldave1 - I believe that if anyone  reveals them self  before the voting is done, the script should be DQ'd. The very essence of the contest is anonymity.  A reveal violates that.

I would disagree. This isn't a contest. It's a challenge. Don, Sean, everyone keep reminding us of this. Don however, is nice enough to give away a mug to whomever wrote the script with the most votes. It is not a contest, nor does winning that mug make the writer an award winning writer.  

In years past, the OWC has always been a fun challenge. The anonymity thing was part of the fun. You spend the first week reading and the second week guessing who wrote what. Now the OWC has grown to 30+ entries so that makes it harder, but the guessing was always part of the fun. IMO, looking back now, it seems to me that the spirit of the OWC has changed since the mug was introduced. People take this way too seriously now and insist on hard rules to be followed or the writer's script should be DQ'd. Not to mentioned you'll be labeled a jerk for not reading all the scripts...I don't know, but I'm much less enthused to take part these days than I used to. The fun part has definitely been dwindling.  

Quoted Text I would disagree. This isn't a contest. It's a challenge. Don, Sean, everyone keep reminding us of this. Don however, is nice enough to give away a mug to whomever wrote the script with the most votes. It is not a contest, nor does winning that mug make the writer an award winning writer.

Your conclusion is true but really doesn't link to the premise. True - the OWC is a challenge and a mug is not going to result in an Oscar. But that's irrelevant. It's either anonymous or not. We could have an OWC where (a) the writers are known (b) can respond and interact with posts made related to their script, (c) etc. etc or have one that is anonymous. Apparently, the latter is preferred. Otherwise???

Quoted Text In years past, the OWC has always been a fun challenge. The anonymity thing was part of the fun. You spend the first week reading and the second week guessing who wrote what. Now the OWC has grown to 30+ entries so that makes it harder, but the guessing was always part of the fun.

You can guess without revealing. e.g., I can say I think John wrote XXXXX. I don't need to say I think John wrote XXXX - oh, and by the way - I wrote ....

Quoted Text IMO, looking back now, it seems to me that the spirit of the OWC has changed since the mug was introduced. People take this way too seriously now and insist on hard rules to be followed or the writer's script should be DQ'd. Not to mentioned you'll be labeled a jerk for not reading all the scripts...I don't know, but I'm much less enthused to take part these days than I used to. The fun part has definitely been dwindling.

Can't speak for the old days so I'll take your perspective. I would add if adherence to a set of guidelines is not desirable, then heck - have a OWC that simply is Write a Short.

I personally do think it is a bit jerky to enter and not comment on scripts. But that's just me.

Quoted from eldave1 I personally do think it is a bit jerky to enter and not comment on scripts. But that's just me.

Of course and some people even delete their comments on scripts they've read if it turns out the writer didn't read any scripts at all. However, nowadays, it seems that you're labeled a jerk if you don't read ALL the scripts.

Anyway, carry on...

Quoted from DustinBowcot Good... we've had two people, in the very least, bottle it this OWC and reveal themselves. The other guy was Dan C. He even sent me a fishing message, mentioning that I hadn't read his yet. I ignored it. I've put a lot of thought into why writers do this... and it comes down to fear. It doesn't have anything to do with reads or even the voting and winning the mug. It's fear of having their ego bruised in public. Doesn't matter what the truth of the matter really is. All that counts is what the truth appears to be... even when nobody really believes it.

ummm, Dustin,
That was not a fishing message.  I had no idea which one was yours, nor did I have any idea if you had read mine yet.  I still have no clue if you read mine.  I asked about your new daughter.  

Not everything is devious.  I had wondered if I read yours and if I liked it.  It isn't the first time I've ever contacted you.  I can post what I sent, but, I don't think it's  fishing at all.

Sorry if that was your take from it.  It wasn't meant in that way.

Dan

At the time of that message, Dan, I'd already read at least half the scripts. You telling me that I hadn't read it yet, was an attempt to interact with me on the subject.

I don't think a script should be disqualified as it's just a friendly competition... this is more of a personal thing. This is a chance to get completely subjective feedback from a bunch of writers, why not take that opportunity? Why lose your nerve and tell your friends, some of who, you know, will give harsh feedback at times? I believe that you're afraid of that, more than you are in writing a script that will never be produced.

The reason anonymity works best is because it avoids the contest turning into one of popularity and concentrates more on strength of story.

I agree with Dustin on this one.
We keep ourselves anonymous for a reason as part of the challenge. That way we get honest feedback on our work, and in return can give honest feedback.
This is my 4th or 5th OWC and I have never outted myself or felt the need to. Obviously no one can stop anyone revealing their work on the public board or in a private mail, but personally I do think it takes something away from the challenge.

Quoted from IamGlenn I agree with Dustin on this one. We keep ourselves anonymous for a reason as part of the challenge. That way we get honest feedback on our work, and in return can give honest feedback. This is my 4th or 5th OWC and I have never outted myself or felt the need to. Obviously no one can stop anyone revealing their work on the public board or in a private mail, but personally I do think it takes something away from the challenge.

I don't know.  I give honest feedback whether or not I like the person or not.  And everyone that I'm friends with on here knows I want the honest truth.  If you think it sucks harder then a 5 dollar hooker, that's fine, I just want to know why.  

Lets face it folks, screenwriting is hard.  Selling something is even harder.  Getting past the wall gods is tough.  I'd rather hear it from someone on here then from them.  So, I would hope that  a person would be honest with me, b/c I sure will be.  I'll never get angry at a person for a harsh review.  

Even Dustin can back me on that.  

That said, I can't imagine Dustin or Jeff or anyone changing their view of a story just because they knew who wrote what.  

Oh, and Dustin, I disagree.  Here is what I wrote:

Hey Dustin,
     How'd your story work out?  I don't think you read mine yet.  Have to check again.  

How's it going?  How's the new addition to the family holding up?

Dan

I asked how your story was going over.  I really have no clue who read mine and who didn't.  And I closed it up by asking about your daughter.  Not sure why you think that's fishing, but, I don't.  It's not a big deal, but, I wasn't fishing.  

This is the first OWC that I didn't out myself.  Yes, a select few know what I wrote, but, for the most part, no one knows what I wrote.  I knew it would suck, so, I wasn't expecting a lot.  Whereas the first 2, I was unprepared for the negative stuff and had to defend myself.  

This one, I knew I'd get roasted.  However, It wasn't hated on too much.  Some didn't like it, some did.  Considering all I could do was cut, I'm shocked it was cohesive in any way.

Dan

Being a newbie I should probably just let you guys debate it, but I don't really get the point in saying who wrote what. I know this is ultimately a bit of fun, but going into this with names available, I think it would change the feedback from those of you who already know each other.

The only benefit to it I can see is that you'd be able to avoid reviewing the script's of those who haven't really participated in giving feedback, but that in itself is just a tad spiteful (even though having gone through them all, it has got my goat).

Also never underestimate how competitive people get. I've seen my missus strop her way round an 18 hole mini putt course before because she's one of these competitive types, and thought people were cheating. If names get revealed I'd imagine it just opens it up for lobbying of scripts, and we've managed to keep it secret so far so why would you change???

Quoted from DanC This is the first OWC that I didn't out myself.  Yes, a select few know what I wrote, but, for the most part, no one knows what I wrote. Dan

It seems ethics are colliding here again. A select few, haha. God, this shit...

What do you think about those who not out themselves and didn't select a few?

I better go to bed and don't invest here.

Back in the day, a good number of regulars would let their friends know which was theirs.  Some even sent it out to a select few in advance for advice and editing.

I don't agree with either of these tactics, and even though, in the past, some have E-mailed, PM'd me and outted themselves...and asked which one was mine, I'd make them wait till the reveal.

It was so bad 1 OWC that a person read mine, not knowing it was mine and left positive feedback.  Within an hour, a friend of theirs told them it was mine (as at the time, unbeknownst to me, my software had my name on it, when you clicked on "properties"), and I literally watched as the positive feedback turned very negative and downright mean spirited.  Things got very ugly, very quickly!

This type of "challenge" has to be anonymous and no entrant should tell anyone which was theirs, unless feedback has already been given, and it's not the kind of feedback that would warrant a vote for best entry.