Quoted Text "OWC: Writers Have To Read 30-plus short scripts about the same fucking thing in a week".

This was my laugh of the morning - thanks much. Got my day started.

Conz - congrats and hope you stick around. I will take you at your word. Although do note that in the rules of the challenge is this:

Quoted Text Participants are strongly encouraged to read and comment/review on the scripts submitted.

So - it shouldn't be a mystery. But again, I'll assume that you just missed this.  

On some future OWCs - I think it would - just for shits and giggles - to have some vote on best logline and/or best title, etc.  We wouldn't need comments - just vote on what we thought was compelling. In terms of industry reads - those items are as important as the script in some instances.

Just mulling as I procrastinate on actually writing....

I go out of my way to read all of the entries because I wouldn't feel that it was fair if I didn't. However, I would rather it that I only read the authors that took time out to do the same for me. If they couldn't for some reason or other, then a simple apology would be enough to make me want to read theirs without expecting a return read. It isn't the winning or losing that bothers me as I always write a script that I would like to see produced, it is the principle. This is a free to enter competition that runs solely on audience participation. Conz didn't read them all, so how can he have a legitimate vote? Probably voted for his own anyway. Sure, he gets a vote, but how can he know what was good and what wasn't? Even this loads the dice, somewhat, in his favour... as it does with any writer that votes without having read all of the scripts.

This time the OWC ran for longer than ever before, yet we had, it seems to me, even less writers actually participating in the reading. They all get avote, yet only have  aselect few scripts to choose from. Selecting 'didn't read' is statistically worthless. It doesn't gain any points.

If we all did the same as Conz, there wouldn't be any such thing as the OWC. It'd be a massive pile of shite.

By the way, I don't want to pile all of this on to one member. Conz stands out the most because he won... but there are others.

Quoted Text I go out of my way to read all of the entries because I wouldn't feel that it was fair if I didn't. However, I would rather it that I only read the authors that took time out to do the same for me.

I agree with your premise. But I trust that Conz's lack of reads was an omission (i.e., he did not understand the expectations).  

Quoted Text This time the OWC ran for longer than ever before, yet we had, it seems to me, even less writers actually participating in the reading. They all get avote, yet only have  aselect few scripts to choose from. Selecting 'didn't read' is statistically worthless. It doesn't gain any points.

Brings up an interesting point.  We really don't know how the results are tabulated. For example, if it is based on total recommends, then the number or reads is critical. e.g., a stellar script with 4 reads - all recommends could be swamped by an average script - 30 reads, 5 recommends.

Conversely, if it was done on average rating or percent basis then the results would flip and a script with minimal reads would be skewed the other way. In the above example, the first script would score 100% (i.e., 4 of 4  who graded gave it a recommend) and the second script would score 17% (i.e., 5 out of 30 recommends).

Quoted from eldave1 I agree with your premise. But I trust that Conz's lack of reads was an omission (i.e., he did not understand the expectations).

Perhaps so.... but he's a bright guy, it doesn't take much to figure out how this contest works.

Quoted Text Brings up an interesting point.  We really don't know how the results are tabulated. For example, if it is based on total recommends, then the number or reads is critical. e.g., a stellar script with 4 reads - all recommends could be swamped by an average script - 30 reads, 5 recommends. Conversely, if it was done on average rating or percent basis then the results would flip and a script with minimal reads would be skewed the other way. In the above example, the first script would score 100% (i.e., 4 of 4  who graded gave it a recommend) and the second script would score 17% (i.e., 5 out of 30 recommends).

Yes, that makes the most sense. Which would make me wrong regarding the value of the 'did not read' option. Indeed, being sure to click that option would be very important. It could be argued that there would be those that would simply click the 'pass' option instead, believing that it doesn't make a difference.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Perhaps so.... but he's a bright guy, it doesn't take much to figure out how this contest works. Yes, that makes the most sense. Which would make me wrong regarding the value of the 'did not read' option. Indeed, being sure to click that option would be very important. It could be argued that there would be those that would simply click the 'pass' option instead, believing that it doesn't make a difference.

I think we are beating a dead horse.  And honestly, he said he screwed up.  You're right, without reading others' scripts, no one ever gets better, no doubt there.

But, I also think that a new person like Conz can help us.  He's fresh blood.  He's got a unique way of looking at writing.  I mean, he doesn't share stories, yet, he comes in here and wins.  So, he's got talent.  Why drive him off?  Don't we need as much talent here to help all of us get better?  Isn't that the overall goal?

I was pissed off too, I even wrote asking him how he liked the other scripts b/c I knew he didn't read many, if any at all.  But, now, isn't it time to just suck it up, and try to get better for our own sakes?  After all, if a person like Conz can come in here and "win" our prize, that says a lot about us.  We need to get better.  

If anything, I want to see what else he comes up with.  And if he sells this, because we helped him get better, then so be it.  We won't know if he was sincere until the next OWC challenge anyways, so, there is very little any of us can do.

He won.  We need to get better.  That's my take from all this.  I'd love if each person read all the stories.  I know I did.  I know Dustin did.  And Jeff read many (and he didn't even enter).  Mark Renshaw read a lot of them too, and he was going through some serious stuff.  

I use to say this about Magic the Gathering card game when people would lose focus and it's worth repeating.  Writing is a job for some, a hobby for plenty more.  It isn't life.  Life comes first.  Believe me when I say you aren't guaranteed tomorrow.  You aren't guaranteed anything.  

This could be the last day you can move.  I go to bed each night wondering that.  Is this the night my spinal cord snaps?  

Don't lose track of life.  Dustin, you have a beautiful baby girl.  That's far more important then what Conz didn't do.  Sure, it's annoying.  But, man, life is short dude.  

Such ends my Hallmark moment.  Send 2.95 to...


I can't wait for the next OWC.  I'm rewriting 2 shorts now.  I learned something from Dustin.  He writes each story with the idea that it gets filmed.  I need to do that.  Shorts are generally cheap, and I know the last 2 OWC I entered won't ever get shot...

Dan

Quoted from DanC I think we are beating a dead horse.  And honestly, he said he screwed up.

I don't care what people say... people generally say what they feel they're supposed to say, what they believe is correct for any given situation, what's going to produce the least argument. I prefer to look at the evidence and make judgements from that. People are generally fuill of shit.

Quoted Text You're right, without reading others' scripts, no one ever gets better, no doubt there.

But I don't actually believe that, and I never said it.

Quoted Text But, I also think that a new person like Conz can help us.  He's fresh blood.  He's got a unique way of looking at writing.

Dan, I'm guessing you're high on prescription meds again. You may feel that Conz is able to help you, but I don't feel the same. You should perhaps just speak for yourself.

Quoted Text I mean, he doesn't share stories, yet, he comes in here and wins.  So, he's got talent.  Why drive him off?

He drives himself off... right after getting a load of reviews on his work. How can I drive off a member that isn't participating anyway? I mean... he doesn't share stories, right? Even if you felt like you could learn something from Conz, he doesn't actually post here anyway... unless it's about his own shit.

Quoted Text Don't we need as much talent here to help all of us get better?  Isn't that the overall goal?

Not for me, no. My overall goal is to glean advice for my in-story choices. I'm not here to learn from anybody. Once one has learned the format then there isn't much we can learn from other writers, as I've said on numerous occasions a writer is the sum of their education and life experience. Not, how long they've posted on an on line website.

Quoted Text I was pissed off too, I even wrote asking him how he liked the other scripts b/c I knew he didn't read many, if any at all.  But, now, isn't it time to just suck it up, and try to get better for our own sakes?  After all, if a person like Conz can come in here and "win" our prize, that says a lot about us.  We need to get better.

The way you look at things is really weird, almost childlike. You're using 'we' as though we aren't individuals. Speak for yourself. Conz got the most votes from a handful of writers on a website, that doesn't make him a better writer over all. Your thinking is skewed.

Quoted Text If anything, I want to see what else he comes up with.  And if he sells this, because we helped him get better, then so be it.  We won't know if he was sincere until the next OWC challenge anyways, so, there is very little any of us can do.

He catered a script for this OWC, to impress a bunch of writers. Impressing producers with the same script will not be as easy. It just won't be as relevant to them.

Quoted Text He won.  We need to get better.  That's my take from all this.

And it's the completely wrong take.  

Quoted Text I'd love if each person read all the stories.  I know I did.  I know Dustin did.  And Jeff read many (and he didn't even enter).  Mark Renshaw read a lot of them too, and he was going through some serious stuff.

I actually find what you did almost as bad. The thing with Mark, you know what he was going through because you talked with him about it during the OWC. You, no doubt sympathised, and this shows in his review of your work. You do realise that? Many of the positive reviews your work got was through courting members and making them sympathetic towards you.

Quoted Text I use to say this about Magic the Gathering card game when people would lose focus and it's worth repeating.  Writing is a job for some, a hobby for plenty more.  It isn't life.  Life comes first.  Believe me when I say you aren't guaranteed tomorrow.  You aren't guaranteed anything.

Wow... that Magic Gathering card game sounds like some serious shit. Seriously sad shit.

Quoted Text This could be the last day you can move.  I go to bed each night wondering that.  Is this the night my spinal cord snaps?

So?

Quoted Text Don't lose track of life.  Dustin, you have a beautiful baby girl.  That's far more important then what Conz didn't do.  Sure, it's annoying.  But, man, life is short dude.

What the fuck are you talking about? You honestly think I find what Conz did more important than my life because I made a couple of posts about it? You're seriously fucked up, mate.

Quoted Text Such ends my Hallmark moment.  Send 2.95 to...

You honestly feel that you've shared some epic words of wisdom.

Quoted Text I can't wait for the next OWC.  I'm rewriting 2 shorts now.  I learned something from Dustin.  He writes each story with the idea that it gets filmed.  I need to do that.  Shorts are generally cheap, and I know the last 2 OWC I entered won't ever get shot...

Stop making excuses. This site isn't going to make you a better writer. Draw from your life experiences. Bring what's real and you can't go far wrong.

I don't want Dave's point to be lost in this quagmire of bullshit, so I'm going to bring it up again. If Dave is correct in that the score is attained by percentages of likes to reads, then this should stop a lot of arguments as the system will be as fair as it can get. It doesn't matter if a writer doesn't read all of the scripts as only the percentage of likes from actual reads count anyway. if one guy likes your script and he's the only one to have read it then your score will 100%, and number 1 script. 10 people read another script and only 5 like it, despite it having 5 votes, it actually only has 50%, so comes in lower than the guy with only one read.

What would be even better is if we all had access to those stats, or even just the final percentages. Probably a little more work for the Admin, but it would help us better determine just how well a particular story has done. It would also help give us a more realistic view on whether a script really is worth working on or not.

Quoted from DustinBowcot I don't want Dave's point to be lost in this quagmire of bullshit, so I'm going to bring it up again. If Dave is correct in that the score is attained by percentages of likes to reads, then this should stop a lot of arguments as the system will be as fair as it can get. It doesn't matter if a writer doesn't read all of the scripts as only the percentage of likes from actual reads count anyway. if one guy likes your script and he's the only one to have read it then your score will 100%, and number 1 script. 10 people read another script and only 5 like it, despite it having 5 votes, it actually only has 50%, so comes in lower than the guy with only one read. What would be even better is if we all had access to those stats, or even just the final percentages. Probably a little more work for the Admin, but it would help us better determine just how well a particular story has done. It would also help give us a more realistic view on whether a script really is worth working on or not.

Just to clarify - I didn't say I knew how they were tabulated. Instead, it was a comparison of how the results would vary depending on two different tabulation methods (i.e., average of recommends vs. total of recommends).

As a note, there are more methods that could be used. As an example, assign 5 points for a recommend and 3 points for a consider - total that number and divide by the number of reviewers  for an average score (i.e., that way, receiving a consider would also garner some value). This could also help with tie breakers. As an example, let's say a script A received 10 recommends, 6 considers and 4 passes  from 20 reviewers.  That would result in an average of 3.4 per review. Let's say Script B received  10 recommends, 4 considers and 3 passes  from 20 reviewers. That would result in an average rating of 3.1. i.e., Script A wins because it tied with B in recommends, but had more considers.

You  could have other rational parameters. e.g., a minimum number of ratings required, a DQ for voting for your own scripts, etc, etc. Heck - you could even have two winners - the best average points and the most total recommeds.

The point being, as it stands now it really is unknown what the impact of non-reads/non-votes is. We also don't know if there is any correlation between readers comments and the number of votes.  i.e., does 20 comments mean 20 votes or are there many readers that do no post comments??

Anyway - Don et al put a ton of uncompensated work into this so I am not looking for new work for them. Grateful for what they do.

However, before the next OWC, I do think it might be helpful to agree on a scoring system, any guidelines to be added (e.g., minimum reads for each participant, etc) - or whatever before we actually start the next one. There should be a thread where we can hash it out. In terms of the scoring work, I am pretty good at Excel Worksheets and am willing to volunteer to sit out the next OWC and create a scoring template and tabulate the votes if that helps out (don't really think I could participate and be the score keeper - because, you know - I would win anyway   

A couple points that need to be made - let's hope I'm not deleted again, as it appears the majority of my posts here were deleted, which makes alot of this discussion seem wierd with nothing leading up to it.

First of all, Conz is not a new member or "outsider".  He's been around since 2011 and he clearly has been aware of the OWC's for a long time, but kept on missing them.  He knew how they worked, so reviewing 3 scripts and then taking the tude he took after the fact is on him.

We don't know how Don "scores" these challenges and my bet is that some on here are taking things a bit too far in assuming the voting is based on anything more than which scripts received the most recommends...but, as I said, we don't know.

The beauty of the OWC is that, in theory, at least, no one knows who wrote what, so reviews are based on the actual writing on display, not the person who wrote it.  Everyone should take this to heart and understand negative reviews are not meant to hurt the writer...they're merely the reader's opinions on what they read.  If you make mistakes, be happy someone points them out to you.

Finally (and in line with the previous paragraph), mean spirited comments, aimed at individuals, should not be tolerated - yes, I'm looking at you, Dustin!  Say whatever you want about a script and what it contains, but why try and put down and hurt an actual person?  Especially when that person already has a bunch of shit going on in their lives.  Just very low class personality traits rearing their ugly head once again.  

Quoted from DustinBowcot I go out of my way to read all of the entries because I wouldn't feel that it was fair if IConz didn't read them all, so how can he have a legitimate vote? Probably voted fo r his own anyway. Sure, he gets a vote, but how can he know what was good and what wasn't?.

Here ya go, Dustin. Consolation prize just for you...



quit your crying.

James

I guess a bad habit of mine is when I quote something, I also include comments from others so not to write too many things.  

Dustin, clearly, you and I look at life a different way.  What works for you.  I know I've been quite humbled by what has transpired in my life.  

And I honestly doubt anyone, and I mean anyone, on this site gives me any sympathy votes at all.  If my project is bad, it's bad.  I've never asked, nor will I ask, for sympathy.  I'm sure each person on here knows that.  

And honestly, how could anyone give me sympathy votes or comments when no one knew what I wrote?  I think I surprised some people this time around.  It wasn't horror or gory.  So, not sure where you think I get sympathy from anyone here.

And anyone who knows me knows that I want the truth, the real truth, no matter how harsh they think.  I'd rather hear it from them, then from a person who could determine my fate in a contest or with an agent/producer.  

you're welcome to believe whatever you want, but, the truth is very different.  

And my tiny bit of advice was to not be so serious about things and be more focused on life.  Each day people lose things that can't ever be gotten back, and they realize it too late what's most important.

Magic can be a wonderful game.  It opens up a whole world of teamwork, adversity, out-of-the-box-thinking and so much more.  Some get too consumed as with any sport, and lose perspective on life.  You can make a living playing magic.  I was good enough at one time to win everything that I needed to play, no need to put my own cash up, I'd just use my winnings.  Many are more successful then I was.  Again, it was a great life lesson and exposed me to a ton of cool stuff.  It certainly isn't for everyone, but, those that do go far rarely say a bad word about it.  

You seem angry or something.  So what if Conz won.  It's over.  I look forward to writing better.  Perhaps you know every aspect to writing, but, there are a ton of things that I don't know, or that I can get better with.  I get the feeling that plenty are like me.  Learning, reinforcing, trying new stuff.  I can get that here.  

Dan

Oh, and one more thing, just because I don't get bent out of shape over a contest and I try to find something positive doesn't make it childish.  I just deal with life's surprises better.  I have no clue what you've been through in your life, but, you also don't know half of the story either.  Don't confuse balance with childish.  Don't confuse control with weakness.  

Quoted from DanC And I honestly doubt anyone, and I mean anyone, on this site gives me any sympathy votes at all.  If my project is bad, it's bad.  I've never asked, nor will I ask, for sympathy.  I'm sure each person on here knows that.

You don't need to directly ask for sympathy. You ask for it by telling people how hard you've got it.

Quoted Text And honestly, how could anyone give me sympathy votes or comments when no one knew what I wrote?

You already admitted that several people knew what you wrote.

Quoted Text And anyone who knows me knows that I want the truth, the real truth, no matter how harsh they think.  I'd rather hear it from them, then from a person who could determine my fate in a contest or with an agent/producer.

What makes you think they will know as much as an agent or producer? Your 'friend' could hate it, yet an agent love it. Two producers could believe it is the worst story they've ever seen, a third could think it's genius. Your friend, could actually fuck it all up for you if you were to follow their advice. In short, if you don't know yourself and have to rely on your friends to figure out what's good and what isn't, then you're pretty much fucked.

Quoted Text you're welcome to believe whatever you want, but, the truth is very different.

How often bullshit becomes truth? How often do we lie to ourselves and each other to make ourselves feel the way we believe we're supposed to feel? To massage our egos? Yo manipulate certain situations? It's a natural part of our psychology that you have to be tuned in to to be aware of, else it just runs in the background without us realising. Like computers, riddled with spyware.

Quoted Text And my tiny bit of advice was to not be so serious about things and be more focused on life.  Each day people lose things that can't ever be gotten back, and they realize it too late what's most important.

You equate being serious with not being focused on life. The more serious one is, the less focused on life they become. This is wrong. Indeed, the more serious you are about anything you do, the more focused you will be upon it.

Quoted Text You seem angry or something.  So what if Conz won.  It's over.

The point you seem to be missing is that I don't care about Conz winning. I care about he not reading any of the other scripts. The winning part bothers you, because you haven't shut up about it.

Quoted Text I look forward to writing better.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Quoted Text Perhaps you know every aspect to writing...

It's pretty simple. You just tell stories. That's all there is to it. If you're good at telling stories, all you have to do is get the words onto the page. It's really not hard at all. There isn't anything to learn that you don't already know. What you need to do now is write stories that people like.

Quoted Text Oh, and one more thing, just because I don't get bent out of shape over a contest and I try to find something positive doesn't make it childish.

I didn't say that was what made you sound childish.

Quoted Text I just deal with life's surprises better.

I have no idea how you've arrived at this conclusion, but thanks for sharing.

Quoted Text I have no clue what you've been through in your life, but, you also don't know half of the story either.

Well, as it is my life, I kinda know the full story. I've been there through it all. Admittedly, there are parts that I can't remember. Especially the first three years, but you can't call that half.

Quoted Text Don't confuse balance with childish.  Don't confuse control with weakness.

I'll try not to, thanks.

Quoted from DustinBowcot You don't need to directly ask for sympathy. You ask for it by telling people how hard you've got it. You already admitted that several people knew what you wrote. What makes you think they will know as much as an agent or producer? Your 'friend' could hate it, yet an agent love it. Two producers could believe it is the worst story they've ever seen, a third could think it's genius. Your friend, could actually fuck it all up for you if you were to follow their advice. In short, if you don't know yourself and have to rely on your friends to figure out what's good and what isn't, then you're pretty much fucked. How often bullshit becomes truth? How often do we lie to ourselves and each other to make ourselves feel the way we believe we're supposed to feel? To massage our egos? Yo manipulate certain situations? It's a natural part of our psychology that you have to be tuned in to to be aware of, else it just runs in the background without us realising. Like computers, riddled with spyware. You equate being serious with not being focused on life. The more serious one is, the less focused on life they become. This is wrong. Indeed, the more serious you are about anything you do, the more focused you will be upon it. The point you seem to be missing is that I don't care about Conz winning. I care about he not reading any of the other scripts. The winning part bothers you, because you haven't shut up about it. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz It's pretty simple. You just tell stories. That's all there is to it. If you're good at telling stories, all you have to do is get the words onto the page. It's really not hard at all. There isn't anything to learn that you don't already know. What you need to do now is write stories that people like. I didn't say that was what made you sound childish. I have no idea how you've arrived at this conclusion, but thanks for sharing. Well, as it is my life, I kinda know the full story. I've been there through it all. Admittedly, there are parts that I can't remember. Especially the first three years, but you can't call that half. I'll try not to, thanks.

I admitted to people AFTER they already commented.  And if you believe that people would vote for my story if it didn't deserve it then you have no belief in the people in this site.  I seriously doubt ANYONE has ever, or will ever, give me a sympathy vote.  EVER.  Nor would I want one.

You seem to confuse explaining my health with looking for sympathy.  I don't.  Sympathy won't win me anything.  However, if people respect what I am able to accomplish in spite of all this, then that's awesome.  However, I think I can safely say that most people on this site respect me for me, for my attitude towards life no matter what, and for the stories that I write.  

Your advice is a double-edged sword.  Sure, my friend could love it and people hate it.  The reverse could also be true.  I'm willing to bet that movies are done each day that you'd hate the screenplay if you read it.  Yet, they get done.  What I'm trying to say isn't whether a person loves or hates it, but, they point out something, be it inconsistencies, plot, character issues, holes, whatever.  That's what all of us need to get to the next level.  

I think I read there has never been a perfect first draft of any story, ever.  And there won't ever be.  Perhaps you get the idea that I'm talking about people loving a story, I'm not.  It's about making it the best that it can be.  Of course, a person that might buy it might hate those changes, that's why it is up to each person to know what they want to do with their story or not.  

Mark and I went for about 4 days on his story that was amazing.  In the end, it's his story.  He knows the scope.

You say that you don't care that Conz won.  But, the truth is, you care that he won AND didn't read a lot of scripts.  If he didn't win, you wouldn't care less how many scripts he won because you didn't single out anyone else who didn't read all that many scripts.  So, you can say you don't care, however, your actions speak louder here.  

You are also wrong about the more serious the more focused you are.  This is incorrect and unhealthy.  You can burn out like a falling star in Earth's gravity if it is unchecked seriousness.  You remind me of me when I was younger.  Life is full of failure and as the TV commercial says, success is just failure that hasn't happened yet.  Being too focused on the end prize means that you miss out on the mundane things that make life special, and just like I burnt myself out more then once, it can happen to you.  There are tons of people in the world who were just as focused as you, perhaps even more so, yet, they flamed out by not having a balance to their lives.  

When Thorsten started talking to me, he hated Evil Genesis and was afraid to tell me b/c he thought that I'd be upset and not want to talk to him or help him anymore.  So, yes, people know about my struggles, but, I seriously doubt that there is one person on here who would use that, or be psychologically affected by it, when dealing with my stories.  I want the harshest fairest criticisms of the story b/c as I've stated a zillion times, I'd rather hear it from here or them for free, then pay to have it tossed aside by an important producer etc for the exact same reason.  So, I reject the premise that anyone here ever gives me sympathy anything.  

You're also wrong in that screenwriting is just telling stories.  There are hundreds of little rules.  Hundreds of little ways to express something.  There are right and wrong ways to tell that story in screenplay format.  There are ways to show a scene.  To say that it all goes into the "telling of a story" is naive at best.  The complexity of setting up the scene is what sets the masters apart from the hacks.  If it was simply "telling a story" then everyone who gets past the first hurdle of writing the story would have oscar-worthy scripts.  Yet, few do.  Maybe you do know it all, I have no clue.  I don't.  And I don't think most of the people on here would say that they do either.

When I see a scene on TV/movies, I want to know how it was written up.  The first time we meet Joy in Inside out I want to know how that was written up.  When the sword comes down towards Anna's hand in Frozen, I want to know how it was written.  When Harry Potter walks into Hogwarts, I want to see how that was set up.  Same for Willy Wonka.  

Think about the greatest movies of all time.  What sets them aside?  In "Night of the living dead" you have the contrast of the black protagonist against the white characters, and his shocking death at the end.  It's how it's told that matters, not just that it's just told.  There are different ways to achieve this.  Clearly, Frozen used different methods then Hitchcock did in Psycho.  Both left their mark forever on cinema.  

Writing a scene is more then just the sum of the words.  It's every aspect of the written word mixed with symbolism mixed with psychology, mixed with intent, mixed with a skillful director to make the correct actor bring it to something breathtaking.  Maybe you can do that.  I can't, not yet.  I've read 2 shorts from you that were very good.  But, perhaps, there's a way to go from very good to breathtaking.  My goal is to be breathtaking.  And have good people along the way to share the journey with.  And a lot of people on here fit that category.

It's easy to become bitter and burn out without perspective to keep it honest.  I'm speaking from experience.  It's your life, but, man, I sure wish someone had told me that before walking down that part of that road when I was you...

Dan

So, when is the next one? July or September? I think there used to be one in July, am I right or am I right?
July, July...