Frizan is a Contest Moderator.

Status

Recent Statuses

4 yrs ago
I DON'T LIKE'EM PUTTING CHEMICALS IN THE WATER THAT TURNS THE FRICKIN' 1X1 SECTION LEWD.
6 likes
4 yrs ago
Oi JOSUKE, I logged on to my personal desktop computation device and went to ROLEPLAYERGUILDDOTCOM, now I'm trapped in the one-times-one section! Ain't that wacky?
14 likes
4 yrs ago
I didn't steal your meme, I colonized it.
7 likes
4 yrs ago
Rush RPG, cyka blyat
4 yrs ago
John Table. The man. The myth. The furniture.
3 likes

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

I've reached a simple conclusion: Both entries shall be added to the trophy case for this Contest(I never specified that only one entry will ever make it!). But I'd like to thank everybody for participating; each entry was an excellent read!
Aaaand the voting period is over! And it seems we have a tie between Inquisitor's Chains and We Don't Say Goodbye. I'll be working out what to do about this, and then I'll update the Trophy Case thread as soon as possible.
@Frizan Closing end of today or... well any second now?


End of the day; you still have time!
I'm going to be letting the voting run until the 28th, mainly for one reason. Due to when the first contest started, new prompts have been going up at about the tail-end of the month they were intended to occupy. So I'm trying to re-align contest start dates to make more sense, and keep prompts from bleeding into the next month over.
Fuckin' dunmer
It takes two...

Voting and Critique




Time for another round of voting!

I encourage everyone that cares about the Contests(and if you don't already, I encourage you to begin now) to read through all of the wonderful entries submitted in the past two weeks, and cast their vote for their favorite! The submission with the most votes will be posted in a stickied "Trophy Case" thread where it will be displayed for all to see, and its author added to the list of Meritorious Writers at the very top!

Of course, this thread is also for critiquing. Note I said critiquing, not shitslinging. Constructive criticism only, please. Feel free to go through any one or all of the entries and give you two cents in helping your fellow writers improve! Those that have entered this contest are absolutely allowed to critique each others' works, and this time authors can also vote, though not for their own, obviously.

Needless to say, using multiple accounts to vote more than once is NOT ALLOWED, and if an author uses alts to vote for their own work, they will be disqualified on the spot and disbarred from entering any future Contests.

Please vote based on the merits of the work, not for the sake of a clique or just because the author happens to be your friend. And mostly certainly do not attempt to have an author falsely disqualified because you don't happen to like them, because I'll fucking find out and it won't be pretty.





by @BCTheEntity and @AngelofOctober


by @Kalleth and @Zelosse


by @shylarah and @Nevix
Just one last day! Be sure to get your entries in by tomorrow; don't be shy!
@Frizan Huzzah! Thank you~

And clarification of how much contribution is needed for authorship to count? Creation of a character, but no actual writing? Initial character creation but the character long since being adopted by the first author, and perhaps a once over for proofing?

Can one author be involved in two works if they did only proofing for one (or something similarly low-involvement) and were the primary writer for the other?


My stance is that if two authors work on an entry, they both did something for the entry, and they both agree that the other did their fair share(whatever that may be), then it's acceptable. There are some issues I can foresee, but I can't really force people into my view of "fair share". I'm also faithful in this community's common sense, so I don't expect one of the two authors to write one sentence and do nothing else, and still say "it's fair!".

As for your second question: No. I don't want people spreading themselves out into several works(I'm not assuming malice, of course) as that could end up causing problems during the voting, as one person could possible make themselves eligible for the winning vote multiple times.
After a bit of thinking, I've redacted the annotation requirement. Names at the top of the entries + confirmation from both authors will suffice.
@Frizan Only thing I see wrong with that is, say I enter but decide to vote for an entry that doesn't have a lot of votes instead of the one that I think deserves it. It doesn't ensure I'll win, but it does give me and everyone else a better chance of winning. I don't think voting like this is necessarily maleficent, but if every entry has 2 votes, they might as well not vote at all. But I do agree with you that it can't really do a lot of harm to let contestants vote. At the very least, it will let other contestants share positive interactions with each other, and will be appreciated if we have a small non-contestant voter turn out like last time.

However, the best type of vote will always come from a third party that has no stake in the contest. It is nice to see that you are taking feedback from people and even trying your own solutions to problems. Hopefully popularity will continue to increase, and I may one day find myself participating in one of your contests.


I can definitely see where you're coming from in regards to the voting. There is a chance for aforementioned shenanigans, but I believe in the honesty of the community. A sort of benefit of the doubt. I will, of course, be continually receiving and considering feedback and constantly tweaking the contests as needed, and if the need arises to return to barring contestants from voting then so shall it be. I am even open to having a judging panel in the future, though that has its own share of issues. But that's what experimentation and feedback is for, and I thank you for yours!
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet