All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
I was merely pointing out, that if a Mod is going to call someone out for doing something they believe to be lax behavior, then call everyone out on it, not just one member.
There is no favoritism. But, if Dave comments on a script with a simple Excellent, the regulars here will know that he thought the script was excellent. How do we know this? He's been around here for several years and we know that he's not only one of the best writers here, but also one of the most helpful reviewers. When a new member or a non regular shows up for an OWC comp and has only one word or one sentence reviews, that doesn't cut it. Why? This person will be voting and there's no evidence this person even read any of the scripts. That's not favoritism, it's just asking the new/non regular reviewer to do a little better. Show us you actually read the script.
Btw, some people want the members of the Academy to prove that they have actually watched the movies they are voting on...
Clarification - I am in this OWC (Didn't say I wasn't).
In terms of this:
I'll try to clarify my point again - my feeling is that there should be a bias in favor of any member, whether they be a new one, old one, loved one, hated one et al that has a history of posting comments on threads that are more than one-liners/worders.
You for instance are relatively new to the site. I found your comments to be insightful, thoughtful and generally indicative of the fact that you carefully read the script. Had you posted a one liner - I loved it - or something like on a particular script, I wouldn't want it deleted because I am biased towards you given your demonstrated dedication to making genuine comments. So my bias would be that - hmm - that's what Gum must really think. i.e., sometimes bias is good (or is that greed?
Thanks for the positive feedback, and sorry, didn’t mean to single you out in all this. I was just wondering what happened re: all the deleted posts etc. Thought the Mods were cracking whips but let a few slide. All good, no bad ill intended.
Oh, BTW… If you search posts by members, you’ll find my first post on December 8th, 2013, 1:26am…
I know I haven’t been around since the beginning of the site, and I may not comment as much as you, but I have been through quite a few OWC’s myself. There’s always some type of back and forth banter between members; I think it’s the only way to truly resolve issues from popping up in future challenges.
There is no favoritism. But, if Dave comments on a script with a simple Excellent, the regulars here will know that he thought the script was excellent. How do we know this? He's been around here for several years and we know that he's not only one of the best writers here, but also one of the most helpful reviewers. When a new member or a non regular shows up for an OWC comp and has only one word or one sentence reviews, that doesn't cut it. Why? This person will be voting and there's no evidence this person even read any of the scripts. That's not favoritism, it's just asking the new/non regular reviewer to do a little better. Show us you actually read the script.
Btw, some people want the members of the Academy to prove that they have actually watched the movies they are voting on...
And, I hate saying things like "as others have said." I definitely think it helps to do that a few times... let's the writer know there's a consensus... but, after it's been repeated a handful of times, the note feels like piling on.
.
The misconception is that entrants have to comment on every entry. All that's required is a fair amount, I read them all, but I didn't comment on all of them. I'd say I commented on a little more than half, give or take. Most of the time, like you, I felt that my comments would be repeating what others have said.
I debated leaving a comment on one of the last scripts I read, simply because my major nitpick was the title page with two to three fancy fonts (there were a few scripts like this, actually) but other than that, I really didn't have anything new to add, pro or con. I guess I could go back and write "Hey, folks, what's up with that eyesore of a title page' or 'how come you didn't turn off your CONTINUEDS footers" (yeah, I seen a little too much of that, too) but if that's all...and if others before me have pointed it out, should I sing with the choir?
I was just wondering what happened re: all the deleted posts etc. Thought the Mods were cracking whips but let a few slide. All good, no bad ill intended.
'all the deleted posts'? That's news to me... I do sleep six to seven hours a night though.
Yesterday I came under fire (unreasonably) for deleting a couple of unnecessary comments not even related to a specific thread.
All up I've deleted three comments during the OWC, and two additional comments from a couple of Newbs who outed themselves prematurely.
Reviews overall have been positive, helpful and constructive.
From my POV, I try always to be measured and considered in my approach before deleting anything, but if it crosses the line of respect for fellow writers and their scripts, involves personal jibes, put downs, derogatory disrespectful remarks with nothing constructive to add - that's not cool in my book.
Thanks for the positive feedback, and sorry, didn’t mean to single you out in all this. I was just wondering what happened re: all the deleted posts etc. Thought the Mods were cracking whips but let a few slide. All good, no bad ill intended.
Oh, BTW… If you search posts by members, you’ll find my first post on December 8th, 2013, 1:26am…
I know I haven’t been around since the beginning of the site, and I may not comment as much as you, but I have been through quite a few OWC’s myself. There’s always some type of back and forth banter between members; I think it’s the only way to truly resolve issues from popping up in future challenges.
Just now finished reading and voting. I've only reviewed 8 so far. (Was afraid I wouldn't make the deadline, and decided reading/voting was more important for now.)
In reading the comments, most of my notes would be/are repetitive. Not sure what to do about that. I hate just spouting the same advice that 6 other people have already given effectively.
And, I hate saying things like "as others have said." I definitely think it helps to do that a few times... let's the writer know there's a consensus... but, after it's been repeated a handful of times, the note feels like piling on.
It's one of the downsides of having to do most of my reading later in the week.
Paul, to each his own. For me, I don't read the comments before the review and I write them as I read. Just one exception - obvious newbie scripts - if I am a page and there's a dozen problems I'll stop and check the comments - if folks already got the gist of the format/typo issues I'll probably not waste time repeating those.
But in general, for me as a receiver of comments, I think repetitive comments have their own value. I'm pretty stubborn-headed, but when I see that several peeps have the same issue/comment it makes me evaluate it even more seriously - so I appreciate repeats - that may be just me - maybe some writers hate them.
The votes are being tallied. Feel free to start guessing who wrote what.
But no outing yourself if someone guesses correctly!
Great job, Rene.
I am shocked at how few comments there were given the broadness of the criteria. Going in I would have predicted this to be one of the most highly read OWCs ever - just such a wide variety of scripts/stories.
If you take the non-participants out, probably about 14 average per script.. eeesh.
Out of morbid curiosity, would like to know how many people voted - is that an easy tally for you to do? No big deal - just looking to see if there is a wide disparity between voting # and commenting #.
I read 22. I guess knowing my time was limited this week I shouldn't have entered. Will take that under consideration next time.
I don't have any idea who wrote what but I've taken note of a few I thought had a similar writing style and I'm super curious to know who the writer or writers are.
I read 22. I guess knowing my time was limited this week I shouldn't have entered. Will take that under consideration next time.
I don't have any idea who wrote what but I've taken note of a few I thought had a similar writing style and I'm super curious to know who the writer or writers are.
22/33 seems like a reasonable number to have read and reviewed - nothing to worry about there.
It's those who read very little or none.
I swear, if a certain person has entered this one and not reviewed -again! - I'm boycotting future OWC until they are banned lol
No idea who wrote what - I thought I spotted Marks and Zacks but I can't remember which ones they are now
Yeah, definitely a little variety this go round. No two stories have were exactly alike, some good, some not so good. But we’re all about the learning here, so any writers feeling discouraged absolutely shouldn’t be.
I’ve no idea who wrote what. Certain people I can pick out but with the volume it was difficult to tell.
I chose, because of my reviewing style, to post my reviews after the voting deadline. This way, even if you got a bad review from me, you can be assured that it will not have influenced the voting at all. So, I should be hated less.
My favourite script was probably Jack and the Beanstalk, partly due to its creativity.
Maybe we should mark on creativity/originality too. It seems an important factor. Some of the scripts here really lacked in that department. There's nothing wrong with giving us more of the same, but each story should have something that makes it stand out from the others. The best stories always have that little extra spark of creativity. They feel new.
Pages: 
Author
The Scripts of the January 2020 One Week Challenge
Logged
Locked Board