If one of your posts comes up "missing", I'll bet that 9 times out of 10, you already know why it's gone.

But for that other 10% that feels compelled to ask "Hey, where did my review go?" -- either publicly or by PM -- this thread will hopefully answer your question.

Much of this was drawn from earlier threads seeking input from active members, and therefore represents a general consensus with very little dissent:


1) Your review is completely unsubstantiated:  It does not matter whether you are praising the script or trashing it.  "This rocks!" will be deleted as quickly as "This sucks!"  Nobody expects you to write a novel when reviewing a script, but if you are a person of few words, one of those words needs to be "because".  

2)  You attack the author:  This really needs no explanation, but note that this is completely different from attacking a script.  Sometimes it is a fine line.  These are judged case-by-case.

3)  You attack the boards:  If you feel you must malign our little corner of the internet, then, just, leave, you know?  

4)  Your post is unrelated to the script:  Sometimes threads will go off on wild tangents, and grow to 30+ posts debating who would win in a fight between Michael Myers and Jason, or how great Celtix software may or may not be.  Those threads will get cleaned out.

5) You are "piling on" five years too late:  I call this one "The Cabin Rule".  If there are 30 posts on an ancient thread stating how wretched a script is -- and the author has never even responded anyways -- what are you even doing there?  Please don't wake these threads up with another "me too" post.  

6) You plan to read the script later:  Please do not post that you may or may not read a script at some unspecified point in the future.  Nobody cares.  Come back and post when you actually have some comments for the author.

7) Your post is nothing more than an advertisement for your own script: "This is great -- now go read mine!!"  No.  I don't think so.

8 ) Your advice is flat-out wrong:  We try not to let the uninformed muddy the waters with really poor advice.

9) You double-post on your own script:  Posting on your script  to let people know you are around for feedback is great.  Once.  But repeatedly bumping up your script to ask for new reads is bad form.  Particularly when the only thread you ever post on is your own.  Commenting on the works of other authors is the best way to draw attention to your own work.

10) Crimes against English and grammar: if u wnt 2 pst lik this, that is gr8, but go fnd a brd that is not 4 writers.

11) "Total Trashing" of a script: The review is an unprofessional trashing that casts a negative image on the site as a whole -- more concerned with amusing yourself at how clever you can be as opposed to delivering any actual feedback.  A more thorough discussion specific to this relatively new guideline can be found here.


Thanks to the numerous members who have contributed to these general guidelines over the years.

There should hopefully not be a lot of chatter on this thread, but if I overlooked something, we can certainly add it to the list.

This thread sucks!



Phil

It does? I wouldn't know - haven't read Bert's post yet. But I will...LATER!!!

Bert doesn't tip waitresses, eats babies, and hates the rain forest.

sheepwalker

Yeah!  You won't find anything like this in my newest script Does Snot Burn?  Just click on the link and read the best script ever.

What?  The link isn't working?  This sucks!


Phil

Leaving the above up so that Dr. Newcomer hisself can delete.  On a serious note, this is great information.  However, in the event I delete Dogglebe, Sniper or Sheepwalker's posts, I will use, "Bert's Post" as the reason.  

Don

Quoted from Don Leaving the above up so that Dr. Newcomer hisself can delete.

Nah...there's room for a few smart-alecks on the thread -- and look -- the usual suspects, too.  Go figure.  Some people just can't help themselves, I suppose.

This thread is just another moderator tool -- so we can respond with a quick link as the need arises -- instead of a long, involved explanation -- and it can easily be amended as new scenarios arise -- as they always seem to do around here.

But since Don popped it into sticky mode (thanks for the validation), let's please not let it spiral completely out of control, eh?

And burning snot...I just don't get that.  I honestly don't.  And I am a very generous tipper.

All kidding aside, the people here should learn to write more than "this script rocks!" or "this script sucks."  We need to know more than this and, since there are no perfect scripts here, there are problems in all of them.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe All kidding aside, the people here should learn to write more than "this script rocks!" or "this script sucks."  We need to know more than this and, since there are no perfect scripts here, there are problems in all of them. Phil

True. If you've had an unproduced script doing the rounds for awhile you need to ask yourself why it hasn't been produced. Honest feedback could help you answer that question.  

But if you think having a deleted 'review' is bad; the other day I read a feature length script and when I sat down to write the review the author had had his script removed.  :-/  

Quoted from bert And I am a very generous tipper.

You can't pay a mortgage with baby bones and rain forest ash. No matter how much you leave them it's still worthless. Those waitresses are struggling...  :'(

But seriously, that's a pretty solid list Bert.

Nice Job.

sheepwalker

These should also be enforced without consequence aka bitching as far as rules go. This is not the act like a child eventhough you're 45 board... I know, shocking.

Bert, you can make this sticky and you know a week later it will be forgotten and people will go back to asking the same simple minded questions that get answered hundreds of times over.

Kind of the same problem I had with the WIP board where people keep posting ideas even after the sticky rules thread. Nobody reads this when the posts aren't new.

Quoted from Old Time Wesley Bert, you can make this sticky and you know a week later it will be forgotten....

Yeah, I know.  But the point is that it's here, so when people ask, we can just post the link and say, "Check out #7" instead of explaining it over and over and over.

Number 7 is a new additon, btw.  Just had one of those this morning....

Quoted from bert 5) You are "piling on" five years too late:  I call this one "The Cabin Rule".  If there are 30 posts on a four-year-old thread stating how wretched a script is -- and the author has never even responded anyways -- what are you even doing there?  Please don't wake these threads up with another "me too" post.

This is probably my favorite one.  Too often, a new person will dig up a script that has long since been abandoned by the author as well as the group.  If you want to read such a script, that's fine.  Before you post a comment, though, you should click on the author's profile to see if he's around anymore.  If he hasn't signed on in the last six months, chances are he or she won't read your comments.



Phil

That could be fixed by taking off scripts from the unproduced part of the MESSAGE BOARD that are by non members and just having members scripts.

The main site contains lots of scripts not on here so it's not like they would get deleted but if we have less "clutter" scripts that people can read we won't have so many of the Cabin Rule's posts going on but of course that would be difficult... Wait, no, it wouldn't.

My opinion anyway.

The older, orphaned scripts could just have their threads locks.  I think this is a better idea and deleting the scripts in case anyone wants to actually read one of them.


Phil

If you really wanted to read them, they exist on the main page so it's not like I'm saying delete them but rather remove them from here where we have to see them every week by NON MEMBERS.

It's not just old scripts, it's the dozen or so every few weeks that nobody owns.

Now, if that were to happen you wouldn't have to spend years campaigning to get reads because people know you're here and every read will be appreciated unlike right now when the reads go to a thread by some guy or girl who never comes by.

Do you enjoy spending more time to get reads than you spent writing the script just because your script is lost by clutter and crap that Joe Blow wrote whom doesn't care that his script got a review?

How about, when you submit a script, if the Discussion Board User Name field is left blank, then the script gets posted on the main site but it doesn't get a thread on the message board?

That might comb out some of those threads where the writer is never around any way.

I'm certainly up for Sniper's idea. I enjoy reading scripts from a variety of writers on these boards and certainly do not read a script only because I want the writer to read mine in return, I gain as much from reading a script (good and bad) as I do from a well thought out  piece of feedback on my own.

But sometimes when I have taken the time to read and review a script and the writer never seems to come back you do wonder whether I should have spent the time reading someone else's script instead - there are many people on these board who put the work in on a daily basis that keeps this site going. Nothing is more annoying that only having a few reads of my own script when someone who never comes to the board gets dozens.

Remember the guy recently who spent 2 weeks complaining that his script was not being posted and not once bothered to read anyone else's while he waited! he got more reads than me!

So I would be well up for only members scripts appearing in the discussion board, maybe allow the admins to put a non members script in here if they feel it would be beneficial to the group i.e. it is very good or worth reading.

Unless it's me, George Willson, Guy Jackson, or any of the others whose username is their real name, people should be able to tell right away whether someone is a member or not, and choose to not read a script at their discretion.

It gets a little tougher with people who've set up accounts and are hardly around, but that should be somewhat easy to spot as well.

When someone posts his/her first script, there's no way of telling if he/she is active on the board right away....unless he/she writes, "Hi, I'm new here.  Please read my/my script."

I still like the idea of putting the writer's user name next to his/her real name in the writing credits.


Phil

Quoted from A Review I only read the first ten pages or so and then other pages randomly but i have to say i didn't like it at all. I thought the writing was immature and stale. Was this a labor of love or a thing you did for fun. What's with character's talking for like five sentences without anyone else saying anything. It happens all over the place and does that really happen in real life????????????? I hope you don't take it personally but if you do then maybe that means you actually want a career in this business. Can't wait to rip your next thing. Remember, your only as good as your bank account says you are and you my non-friend, are not good. But i hope you can prove me wrong.

What about this one?  If you were a mod, would you leave it or delete it?

Why?

I'd say the first part of the review is acceptable, although some examples would be nice.

For example: "I thought the writing was immarture and stale." - okay, give us an example of what you thought was 'immature' and 'stale.'

Also, the whole "what's with the character's talking for like five sentences..." needs examples too.

But the last two sentances do not offer anything to the writer. Infact, they sound arrogant and unwarranted. We are here to help each other, not rip each other.

As Stew said, some examples would be good, but otherwise it was fine until:

Quoted Text I hope you don't take it personally but if you do then maybe that means you actually want a career in this business. Can't wait to rip your next thing. Remember, your only as good as your bank account says you are and you my non-friend, are not good. But i hope you can prove me wrong.

Everything after the "but if you do" lost all credibility with this reviewer.  If this review was on something of mine I'd look at this and be like...okay, you're hoping I don't take the review personally...but then just in case I do you try to put me in my place and rip me a new one?  Up yours, man.  

I'd still let it stay because the review actually has a tad of feedback that may be useful(key word: tad), but the reviewer really makes it look like they're stuffing a sock down their pants in a really, really foolish way.  "But if you do." .... Dude, what?

Quoted from bert What about this one?  If you were a mod, would you leave it or delete it?

If in doubt - kick it out.

Hey, it rhymed.

The review started of fine but then spiralled into something extremely unproductive and rather personal. I don't know if the author of the script in question were bad mouthing reviewers but that last part was totally uncalled for.

Thanks for the input, guys.  I was not sure last night, but today I have decided to delete it.

While there was some genuine feedback there -- albeit only marginally useful -- the official ruling is that personal attacks such as this --

Quoted from Reviewer Remember, your only as good as your bank account says you are and you my non-friend, are not good.

-- should generally trump the other aspects in what is an otherwsie marginal review.

Not only was he calling the author a bad writer, I think he was also calling him a broke writer!  How cruel is that?

"Not only was he calling the author a bad writer, I think he was also calling him a broke writer!  How cruel is that?"

Cruel or not, it's completely absurd and uninformed to imply a fat bank account = talent. Let me name, just off the top of my head, some great writers who lived and/or died poor...

Edgar Allen Poe, George Orwell, James Agee, Walt Whitman, Jack Kerouac, and this hack of a writer some of you may have heard of named Herman Melville died very poor.
Anyhow, nice rules regarding the regulation of the comment boards. As I'm new here, I'll keep them in mind. Most of them aught to be common sense to the earnest, thoughtful and sincere writer.  

Common sense is not an internet trait.

I suppose not. People seemed to toss all self-censorship to the wind without their words being attached to their face. It can be entertaining to a point but, as is evidenced above, it becomes a hindrance. Anyhow...