Personally I'd rather get the OWC feedback unfiltered, so I'll never out myself in the thread or PM/emails etc.

But this just a bit of fun, if people really want to out themselves, for whatever reason, then I don't care and I don't really care how many reads I get either - it'll be a similar number to what I get when I normally post a short, so it's all good.

Long live the OWC

I won't reveal what my votes will be, but just a few standout moments in this owc:  

Favorite Character - Supermick
Best LOL line - FM
Best concept - Googleman

Quoted from Dreamscale 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.

I hope I never turn into that type of person.  If a script is good, I will admit that it's good.  If it is bad and written by a good friend of mine, I will say it's bad.

And the reason people knew it was my script was that one person helped review it before I entered, so, they obviously knew which was mine, and a few others PM'd me and said that I gave good advice on their script.  

And Jeff, you did "kinda" say to contact you   So, I did.  But, it was after the feedback was left.  I don't think I knew anything from anyone (nor did they from me) until all the comments were done.  Once the feedback is left, I won't alter it.  If a person I hate (there aren't any) wrote something good, I'd have to give it to them.  

And like I said, every person that I'm close with on here knows that I want the truth, and they want the truth too.  So, feelings never get involved.  Truth is truth.  

That said, it is up to me to see if I want to accept that advice, or if that advice is correct for the story.  When I read Mark Renshaw's amazing story about psychos, we argued for a good week what I thought his character would do, knowing how psychos think, at a point in the story.  I reminded him that it's a great thing when people are talking about a made up character a week later.  We both laughed.

Kinda like the debate I got into about Elsa on Frozen Fever.  The person ultimately forgot that they aren't real.  The writers chose what Elsa does.  I found it cringeworthy (if anyone didn't see Frozen Fever, which is really cute) when Elsa shows an image of her draped on Anna's frozen body as a party image.  

Dan

Quoted from AnthonyCawood Long live the OWC

Amen!!

Quoted from eldave1 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???

The first OWCs i entered at SS was something along these lines where the writers could use thier real names if they chose to. But the reason for it was a rare case. It was one of the October/Halloween ones. There has been only one other time, to my recollection since I been around where the writer's names could be used when submitting- but that was a rare, special circumstance where an indie filmmaker was looking for low budget horrors.

As for myself, coming up with alises is half the fun. Another part of it for me is knowing that by now, the majority of SS regs know my writing style for better or for verse   So I throw in a few wrinkles to make it less obvious The result is usually mixed. Sometimes I'll even comment on my own work to throw off peeps off the trail. Not that anyone pays that much attention to me anyway.

As for the aliases and those who squeal on themselves before voting is done, that should not DQ a script.Nor should a misinterpetation of the guidelines or simply not following the theme, although those factors may affect the rating score.

As for the crappy mug- count your blessings. Folks could have had those inane "top three of the month/week club" where new peers would sell out their own mothers just to be King Of The Hill For A Day - and retain for reasons unknown to most, a mentality with delusions of grandeur.

Googleman does have a feature potential for me

Funniest piece of dialog got to be this:
"Tu brilling es Alice... Thank you for unfishing my gimble

Tu brilling es Nigel... I think."

(not votes revealed by the way)

Two funniest scene for me included no dialogue. One was the scene of SuperMick just flying away as the dragon wreaked havoc on the townspeople (including his own wife!) and the other was from Mother Nature's Joke, as the hamster ball rolled along the corridor approaching Saddam's den of thieves. Funny funny stuff!

Quoted from SAC and the other was from Mother Nature's Joke, as the hamster ball rolled along the corridor approaching Saddam's den of thieves. Funny funny stuff!

Lol, I remember that one. Yeah, that was really funny.

I was going to respond after reading all the comments going back and forth in this thread about breaking the rules of the OWC, and then I remembered: I couldn't give a flying ****.  

Quoted from Gary in Houston I was going to respond after reading all the comments going back and forth in this thread about breaking the rules of the OWC, and then I remembered: I couldn't give a flying ****.

Maybe so, but you have to respect those that do.
that said, I'll admit my entry wasn't exactly on the narrow path, and the comic book related jokes were lost on my readers. But my rule-bending wasn't intentional, but a misunderstanding. That said,  I don't thumb my nose at those that stuck to the guidelines.

An update: the Writer's Choice E-mail has been sent.

REC's (in no particular order):

Johnny Come Lately
The Talk
Flying High


Considers:

FM
Mother Nature's Joke
SuperMick
Local Hero
The Symbol
Googleman

My votes are in - a bit tough as we were just asked for top three and I had 4 recommends. Narrow margin between 3 and 4 and I probably could change my mind tomorrow (oh well- got down to three).

Interesting to see what impact the change in voting structure brings. i.e., since top three only, scripts won't tally points for considers.  

Anyway - task complete.  

I only had 3 recommends anyway. There were two that I was wavering between rec and consider with, so the voting method forced my hand with those two.

Still though, that's 9 scripts that I selected either for a rec or consider. That's a lot. For me, that's a hell of a lot. Usually I get like three scripts, with one rec and two considers. To have 9 in the running is superb.

Quoted from DustinBowcot I only had 3 recommends anyway. There were two that I was wavering between rec and consider with, so the voting method forced my hand with those two. Still though, that's 9 scripts that I selected either for a rec or consider. That's a lot. For me, that's a hell of a lot. Usually I get like three scripts, with one rec and two considers. To have 9 in the running is superb.

I grade the scripts on a A,B,C,D,E,F scale. An A or a B+ gets a recommend from me and a B gets a consider.

I had four B+ (very solid scripts - but not knocked out of the park - still a recommend).

I had 5 B ratings (considers).

So, we both arrived at nine.  Maybe not the same nine - but nine.

I don't object to the new voting method but am curious as to how it affect the outcome, if at all. In the past, I assumed that "considers" contributed to the point totals and this time - not so much. So, in the past - a more vanilla reaction to a script, e.g., most thought it was a B level - few hated it, no one loved it (something like "The Martian") probably would score well vs a script that was more polarizing (i.e., half loved it, half didn't get it). e.g., something like The Hateful Eight.  Anyway - just babbling.