I wrote mine in an hour or so, but I only had five minutes or so to revise before submitting; no particular reason, just life. It's been doing rather well, but in my haste I let a couple of nasty errors slip by.

I finished mine in about three hours, around 36 hours before the deadline, and even sent in a revision to correct typos... yet left a gaping, obvious error that I didn't see until a reader mentioned it.

It's really hard to proofread your own work without letting it sit for a while. My hat's off to people who pulled off a coherent entry.

Quoted from Warren Random question but how much do people think readers are influenced by previous comments on the script, be they positive or negative?

For me:

Only positive comments affect my view - by affect I mean think about it.

1. I always read the story before I read the comments.  

2. When done, if I thought something was weak but other writers loved it I'll read again to see if there was something I missed. Maybe was just in a pissy mood or something. Most times my view does not end up changing.

I don't read the comments until I'm done writing my own. Even if I'm duplicating comments, I'll still write them.

There are few commentators that say stuff like: I agree with everyone else. And then I think: what??? Not the case for me, I identify with the other "everyone". I don't intervene then, but generally don't like that kind of defining a group of people and somehow confirming something as the "validated opinion". It's what imo strengthens that herd behavior that some might have talked about before if I understand it right.

But a big wtf

It's a fun challenge

I think it's partly through laziness and partly through being afraid of having a different opinion to the majority. Either, or, or a mixture of the two.

I've caught myself doing it too. I'm not immune. Just aware of it.

I generally don't read the comments until after I post my review, but I did do so on accident on at least two occasions during this round. I think it's great advice to hold off on looking at the comments until one has formed their own opinion, but there's no real way to police that. The very nature of voting on something as subjective as a creative work simply lends itself to that sort of thing.

I agree that there's a potential for bias and/or parroting here, but I also feel that some people may be overthinking it a little bit. Even if there is something at play, I highly doubt that most of the writers here lack the autonomy to take these things into account. I think most of us can make a fair vote.

Simply ask yourselves these questions:
If a script you liked got poor reviews, would you complain or seek to invalidate the consensus?
If a script you hated got good reviews, would you complain or seek to invalidate the consensus?
If your own script got poor reviews, would you complain or seek to invalidate the consensus?
If your own script got good reviews, would you complain or seek to invalidate the consensus?
If your answer is "yes," then simply vote to the contrary and make your opinion known to maybe help people see why they're wrong. There are threads in which to do so. That's the whole point of a voting system.

I also think we could all benefit from discussions on the paired threads once the voting is done. No one should have to "justify" their votes, per se, but perhaps knowing people's reasoning for why they felt the way they did would help assuage some people's fears of parroting or bias.

Yeah, well, all right of course, we're all bound to subjectivity, for sure. And so I only agree with my sight on injustice

I do sports with a funny cop. When something goes wrong in his eyes he sometimes suddenly stops playing and shouts: I hate injustice.

I always chuckle within myself and love it when he's doing that. One second later he fetches after the ball again...

I've read on these comments on comments.

Somehow I can still have an independent view of the value of comments.

I believe the same is true for scripts.

Who justifies himself, accuses himself.
No, seriously believe you, bro.

The 12 Angry Men plot is fantastic because it builds up on that one deep statement of the oldest juror who declares in case of the architect juror that it's not easy to stand alone against all, so he should talk.

Quoted from ReaperCreeper I also think we could all benefit from discussions on the paired threads once the voting is done. No one should have to "justify" their votes, per se, but perhaps knowing people's reasoning for why they felt the way they did would help assuage some people's fears of parroting or bias.

I've commented on every script..... why comment on the paired scripts too? Next time all comments can just go in the paired threads as there will be no single ones. Few bumps in this one, but it's a learning curve.

The parroting thing is something we just need to remind ourselves of from time to time. No harm in bringing it up or for wanting for a solution.

Very easy to claim the majority don't do it while also including yourself amongst that number. That you don't do it is neither here nor there as this conversation is only in regard to those that do - whether that be a minority or otherwise.

Quoted Text I've commented on every script..... why comment on the paired scripts too? Next time all comments can just go in the paired threads as there will be no single ones. Few bumps in this one, but it's a learning curve.

Yes, this is what I would like next time around. We agree.

For this one, though, I still would suggest it as something optional that people could consider doing, since most of the comments on the individual script threads are generally isolated to the script in question, at least for the most part... there are certainly exceptions. What I was thinking was more along the lines of a compare-and-contrast just to see how differently the writers dealt with the assigned themes and parameters. I pictured it as something optional, like a bonus. Not a requirement.

Quoted Text The parroting thing is something we just need to remind ourselves of from time to time. No harm in bringing it up or for wanting for a solution. Very easy to claim the majority don't do it while also including yourself amongst that number. That you don't do it is neither here nor there as this conversation is only in regard to those that do - whether that be a minority or otherwise.

Lol, fair enough, I guess. I just don't see it as much of a big issue. Others do and that's OK. I did it myself on occasion, as I stated, but didn't feel as though I was swayed one way or another.

It's a bigger issue than we probably realise. I haven't factored member popularity in yet. Certain members are respected for their opinion, or the way they present their opinion (using obscure vocabulary, for example) and this on its own can be enough to sway another's.

I read all the scripts. Then I voted. Then I read the comments.

I'm one of those that would occasionally say things like "I agree with others who have said..." I find it helpful as a writer to know if there's a common reaction to a particular element of my script. If that reaction is counter to what I'm attempting to accomplish, I know to make changes.

But, I do understand the point regarding group think.

I can honestly say that I don't let what others wrote influence my opinion.  I read them to make sure I don't beat a dead horse further into the ground.  

Will someone please acknowledge why the pairing with Cell Mates has no voting site??

Back to the topic,  there was the preacher script.  Most liked or loved it.  I disliked it and said so and voted for the other story.  So I'm pretty sure that I don't let others influence me.

Dan