Let my preface this thread by saying that I don't want this to turn into a shouting match. I'd like to have a serious discussion about the topic. Let's try to stay on point.

So my main question is this, do you think anonymity is beneficial or detrimental to the overall purpose of the OWC?

A fellow member and I were discussing the differences between the most recent OWC and OWC's past. It seems as though this OWC caused a lot of headaches. People were pissed, fights broke out, and accusations were made. In the past, OWC's were fun and light hearted. Members were anonymous because it turned the contest into a fun guessing game oh who wrote what. But this time around, it didn't seem nearly as jovial.

Now granted, I've only been on the boards for 4 years or so. And much of that time, I've been ghosting. Furthermore, the boards are growing...and that's a good thing. But you don't want to discourage new comers. Maybe this is a by-product of the board's growth.

Lastly, I'm not writing this post in response to my own entry. I wrote it in two days and appreciate all the feedback. I'm not bitter whatsoever. I'm only bringing this topic up because the overarching negativity seemed prevalent in the contest as a whole.

I think the anonymity is what the OWC is all about, and without it, you'll find most will sugarcoat their reviews, or downright gush for certain peeps, even though their effort may be extremely weak.

The board has certainly grown and many of the old guard no longer enter the OWC's, nor do they even post much.

So, the fighting must be due to the new crowd.   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

IMO, the anon thing has had its day.,it really serves no purpose now.  Hardly anyone can tell who is writing what except for a couple of exceptions.

If anything, getting rid of it ensures that perps who don't read other scripts get the cold shoulder they deserve.

For the 2010 Hallowenn OWC we didn't use it - not sure why - and there wasn't a prob. If anything that OWC produced some of the best scripts I've seen on site in my time here.

Maybe we could have a vote on it?

I'm fine with the anonimity. It has downsides but I like the idea that readers know not who wrote it so can read without prejudice. And that is quite something.

As for those that don't read their fair share it's easy enough to work out who.

Not having the anominity won't make them read. It'll just make them easier to spot later, a week or two after the scripts are posted. And by then it's too late.

R

I had zero idea of any of the writers. Not even a guess. In fact, the only one I guessed I guessed wrong. I think anonymity is critical to it.

The only 1 I knew for sure was Ren's Jowls.  I'ma ctually shocked that no one else knew immediately.  I mean...c'mon...the script is written exactly like his posts.

Really?

Hell, I even thought Pia wrote mine, so maybe I fooled myself?   ;D ;D ;D

Anonymous is the way to go, IMO.

I agree 100% with Kevin.  The OWCs are one of the only opportunities we have to be reviewed on this board completely blindly... without personalities coming into it at all.  Which is a good thing.  And very instructional.  :)

But Jeff,

Only you feel like that. Everyone else didn't notice. Maybe you're obsessed and reading my posts over and over.

This would be understandable. You just need to relax more.

And don't try to out me again. It's not in the spirit of the thing.

R

I appreciate the anonymity for the benefit of my own reviews towards others.

I know I would soft punch my friends here.
With anonymity I can't go off the chain feral though, so I still have to temper my "constructive criticism."

And even with the ying and yang of those conflicting forces I still feel like I've sucker punched a few of the people here I care about.
Sorry.

But without anonymity I wouldn't be able to provide clear minded ruthless vision to anyone, for whatever it's worth and such that it is.



Keep the anonymity, please.

Oh, and don't fool yourself, AP.

I've long identified simplyscripts as "Wright Club" in serous mockery of 'Fight Club.'

People get the ever-loving sh!t beat out of themselves here.

Some stay, come back for more.
Many die and never come back. (I wish 'em well in this biz.)
Some of us gladiators just grin with blood drooling from our mouths looking for the next poor f#cker to be beat or be beaten by.

This isn't some community workshop.
This isn't aunt Betsy's book club or sewing circle.

Emotional blood running rivlets from this dark alley to the heartless city gutter has lonnnnnng been the sign to where we meet.

You can't pine away for long lost days that never existed in the four years I've been here.

I just accept this alley for what it is.

Quoted from albinopenguin It seems as though this OWC caused a lot of headaches. People were pissed, fights broke out, and accusations were made. In the past, OWC's were fun and light hearted. Members were anonymous because it turned the contest into a fun guessing game oh who wrote what. But this time around, it didn't seem nearly as jovial.

Really? I thought it was pretty much the same as it always is - a few squabbles and differences of opinion, but nothing that bad. I've seen it get way more heated than this one.

Anonymity is paramount imho - without it I don't feel the feedback would be anywhere near as honest or candid. I wouldn't change a thing.

Really? Perps think that reviews would be different if they knew who wrote what?

I'm shaking my head at that one lol.

Stevie, I'm telling you I would pull punches.

I think there's truth in this. There's no way of being sure who wrote what. Jeff was sure I wrote Jowls but it could easily have been sombody imitating my style. He said he was sure, but he didn't actually know for certain.

With anonimity you can't prejudge a script.

Whether we like it or not, we all do that if we're aware of the writer and their previous efforts, and even what they have written in posts.

R

Quoted from RayW Stevie, I'm telling you I would pull punches.

Well, that's good! As Jeff says, his reviews come over harsh sometime as he doesn't like to sugarcoat things and that's fair enough.

Say the next OWC is not anon, right? And Jeff or you or whoever produces a script that most of us don't think his up to his or hers usual standard. Let the lambasting begin, I say!

Then again, if I wrote something that I didn't believe in or think was average, then I wouldn't enter it just for the sake of having a script in that challenge.

Anyway, no use in quibbling about it so this is my last word on it.

Valid debate, but I vote anonymous.

The best voting method around here is Movie Poet.

It's annoymous, and you can't vote for yourself.

The only problems there are;

# Usually five pages of less

# Not in real time - so you find out at the end of the month a long time after reading when the energy has gone

# Not allowed to discuss the scripts as you go along - or slag them off

The OWC  blends this. It's not perfect but I think I learn more from OWC than anything else.

Including the phrase 'dick punch her fart box' - something that has stuck to me like....err.... A slimy thing. Yuck.

Quoted from albinopenguin Lastly, I'm not writing this post in response to my own entry. I wrote it in two days and appreciate all the feedback. I'm not bitter whatsoever.

Interesting you say that... as that was my initial thought when I read your post.

I don't believe that any of the arguments this time were down to anonymity. One was down to Jeff cowardly entering a pisser, another was down to Jeff trying to cover his tracks by placing Pia's name on the document, another was down to silverback entering a one-pager... and kevin and I had a disagreement over what makes a producible shark script. Can't think of a single one where anonymity was the cause. Indeed total anonymity would have prevented all of the arguing altogether... until later.

I'd prefer anonymity... as I can then change my style whenever I want and attempt to put off the haters. Not that I'm bothered by negative comments from other writers... especially those that are struggling with their own work or even considering giving up to a life of hawking ebooks... but it's just nice to be able to fool them and snatch a decent review when I can. That would NEVER happen if there wasn't anonymity.

Keep them Anon - IMO. All you deal with is the script, that's pretty much all you have to go on.

People can guess if they want to - I got two right and three wrong - out 28 - not a great return. The rest, you just have to base what you say on what you see in front of you, and for me that's what works about it - and if people want to enter stuff into competition, send stuff off to proco's, etc then they get an idea of what's seen by the people on the receiving end of their entry.

As far as tiff's go - this one was no worse than any other - only difference I felt was the writing quality over-all was a notch higher.

All valid points. And honestly, I'd prefer to keep it anonymous as well. However, I wish I participated in last October's OWC. Seems like an interesting twist on things.

Just contemplating the idea of anonymity and how we review scripts. We all have a degree of obscurity being that this is an online forum. As much as we'd like to think that we'd tell each other our thoughts in person, that's simply not the case. And the OWC's add an extra layer of ambiguity.