I know what you mean, many are read at night, but it's been a good challenge.

Indeed, I want to go back to one script as it was late when i read it and on reflection i'm not sure i was fair.  i appreciate those who have been considerate to me.

Just about to finish the last three. With the exception of maybe one script, I found all the entries to be quite inventive. Most people obviously dug deep (with varying degrees of success). I really enjoyed my first OWC - my cherry is officially popped, now I want more!

I think when people post a pisstake on the boards--especially during OWC--it discourages reading of other scripts.  I didn't see it prior to its removal.  If I did, it would've upset me.

Jeff, you talk about people needing to read all the scripts and, yet, you post one of these?  It kind of goes against your overly-critical, hard-ass format-nazi persona.


Phil

I would hope to read, and make some small comments at least, on as many of the entries as possible. Work, and doing a Degree, get in the way though and I would be surprised if I did all 32, or even a majority before identities are revealed.

I have commented on my own. It obviously doesn't make sense to skip it. Hardest part is reading someone's comments and wanting to respond but having to resist!

Phil, I purposely wrote a logline that made it perfectly clear what the script was, and within the first passage, it was again crystal clear exactly what it was.  If someone decides against reading it, after that, that's perfectly fine.

For me, it's a very liberating experience...and quite comical, as well.  Whether others see it as humor, is up to them.

Let me be clear again on my point about "reading all" the scripts.  We all know that it's a common occurrence for writers to post OWC scripts and read and comment on absolutely ZERO scripts.  It is also more common for writers to post a script and then read a few of the other entries...most likely ones they are already familiar with who wrote it.  Everyone then "votes" for their 3 (or whatever number) favorites.  If you read 0% -20% of the entries, how can you vote for a favorite in good conscious?  How much does that vote really mean?  Nothing.

There are always several of the better entries that get very few reads, while other, sometimes absolutely terrible entries, get many reads and comments.  Doesn't seem right to me.  To say that a purposely written pisser is any worse than an unintentional pisser, or "steals reads" from better scripts is rather hypocritical, IMO.

I always give each and every script a fair shot.  If it's too bad to finish (IMO), I'll come out and say that, so at least the writer knows I didn't skip their script for some unexplained reason.  IMO, it's the only fair and reasonable way to go about it.

Reading and commenting on 30+ scripts in a few days is a big time investment, but all entrants should take that into consideration before even entering.  If something comes up that takes one away from this, that's cool.  If someone knows up front they won't be able to read, they should acknowledge that up front and make sure they "repay" their readers ASAP, when they do have the time.  IMO, it's just common courtesy and decency.

People say I'm harsh, cold, or downright mean in my feedback, but one thing I stick to is being honest.  Some things may be my own personal opinions, but I feel it's important that writers understand what can potentially turn their readers off and why.  It's up to each individual to decide how to take feedback and criticism.  When it comes from me, it is meant to help and enlighten...whether they choose to acknowledge it or thumb their nose at it, is completely up to them.

I don't ask or expect anything more than I give, and that's honest feedback that highlights mistakes of all forms.  When I make a mistake, I want to know about it and am thankful that someone caught it for me.  It always surprises me how that doesn't seem to be the case for most others.

It's one thing to be honest; it's another thing to be brutal.  And I'm not just talking about the OWC; I'm talking in general here.

When someone posts his/her first script here, and you slam it, you scare him off.  You don't have to lie about how you feel but you can try to be a little more encouraging.  The experienced writers can take; I wouldn't be surprised if a number of them just ignore you.  The new guy, OTOH, doesn't know you're so harsh with everyone; they think they're a shitty writer.

Again, try being a little encouraging.


Phil

Phil...seriously...are you telling me you don't find some of your comments/reviews/feedback extremely harsh, as well?  I'm obviously not going to do a search and bring certain instances to your attention, but I'm quite sure I've seen a number of doozies from you in the past.

I'm not sure why someone would enter their very first script ever written into a 1 week writing challenge, either...not the way to go, IMO, for many reasons, other than just the restraints.  Feedback is usually limited in these challenges, as peeps are trying (hopefully) to read as many as they can and not dwell on extensive feedback.

If the "experienced writers" ignore my comments, that's their prerogative, but not very smart, IMO.  The things I bring up are real and obviously unknown or not caught at the time of writing, so why one would choose to ignore such feedback, is beyond me...unless they're writing poorly on purpose, and if that's the case, their entries should be pulled, just like mine was.  

Make sense?

Good evening all,

I'd just like to say that this was my first OWC, and indeed my first finished script, and so far it has been a very enjoyable experience. My reviews have been pretty mixed, some have liked it which has been encouraging, and some really haven't. I'm in no way disheartened by the criticism as for the most part it was very constructive. At first read the criticism stung a little, but then I took a few deep breaths, followed by a 'man up' pill, and I realised that with the help of feedback provided I can certainly turn it into a much better script. Something I intend to, and will, do at some point.

I do plan to review each script but wanted to read them all before doing so, hopefully on my next day off I can just rattle them out for everyone. It's only work and the fact I'm a slow reader causing the hold up right now.

Just for the record the two that I've enjoyed the most so far are 'Sweet Justice' and 'Splitzkrieg', well done to whomever you are.

Cheers,

Arty.

Hey Arty. Thanks for chipping in. When you read, don't be afraid to comment. Good luck with your first script.

Quoted from Dreamscale Phil...seriously...are you telling me you don't find some of your comments/reviews/feedback extremely harsh, as well?

I know some of my critiques are harsh.  I'm harsher with the more experienced writers and harsher with those who just don't listen to critiques of past scripts.  Your critiques, OTOH, seem to be all harsh.


Phil

I've checked out 27 scripts so far.

So is there still another batch?

Cindy

Oops! Nevermind, I found them.

I think expecting participating writers to read all 32 scripts is impractical. It’s a lot of scripts to read and after a while the feedback tends to get repetitive. It would make more sense to assign writers 6 or so scripts. This ensures all of them get read a fair amount of times. They can, of course, read whatever they want beyond their assigned reads.

Also, I think pisstakes and multiple entries should be excluded. Multiple scripts from the same writer and pisstakes are annoying and offensive when there are so many entries to read.

I also think writers who enter should have to read every page of the scripts they comment on. I think this is different than giving regular feedback. This is a challenge, not the regular board.

My suggestion is to:

1) Assign a select number of scripts to entrants to read and comment on.
2) Readers score each of their assigned scripts.
3) Top scoring scripts get a certain number of low scores dropped.
4) The highest scoring script is the “winner.”

And, of course, I’m allowed to read whatever I want.


Breanne

As a newbie, the concept of "pisser" is new to me. I assume that it is just for a laugh? a script written by someone in a deliberately bad manner?
If so, not sure what purpose that serves but hey ho.

Anyway, In real life, I am a very sensitive person, so coming here and getting some harsh feedback should have shook me or upset me away to never come back.
BUT I know that all art is subjective and any critique should be taken within the spirit of the harsh real world we live in. A thick skin is definitely a requirement in any media/art/entertainment outlet (as a music producer and DJ I have had my fair share of lovers and haters).
My point is that I take no offence at even the harshest of opinions but can see the difference between flaming/trolling and proper, well thought out, critique.
I try to draw wisdom from their knowledge and perspective from their opinion and I would urge any other newcomers to stick with it and talk about what has been said in a subjective manner.

By the way, what happens next on the OWC? do we vote or reveal or just wait for the next one?

Darren,

A pisser is an entry that is there to make fun of the challenge rather than take it seriously.  The reason people don't like them is because it takes reading time away from other scripts that are seriously trying to meet the challenge.  And if you have a bunch of them, like we did one challenge where half of them were pissers, then it's a real drag to read the scripts.