2008 News & Views: Discussion and Announcements for the Survivorphile

[CrimsonMaiden]

I suggest ditching this and starting fresh with some other approach. We are at the beginning of a year, where this could be done.

The rules have been revamped extensively for 2009. Considering you don't have a horse in the race, I'm not sure why you are complaining.

In the end, any changes to a participants submissions (ie, categories) are made by the site owners, not by the moderators. We can only forward our suggestions to them. They make the final decision.

Oh, and just to add this: Some of the griping about the "non-stand alone" chapters might be moot anyway considering that many of them are miscategorized in the first place.

 

[Boxlicker101]

In all honesty, the new rule, which went into effect, I believe, on Jan. 8 should have been included in the official rules by editing them. It was early enough in the year that it could have been done with no inconvenience to anybody. However, the fact that it wasn't doesn't make it any less of a rule. The same rules apply to everybody.

I also have continued stories, but I actually have something of substance in the parts. Smutty substance, it's true, but substance nonetheless.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The rules have been revamped extensively for 2009. Considering you don't have a horse in the race, I'm not sure why you are complaining.

In the end, any changes to a participants submissions (ie, categories) are made by the site owners, not by the moderators. We can only forward our suggestions to them. They make the final decision.

Oh, and just to add this: Some of the griping about the "non-stand alone" chapters might be moot anyway considering that many of them are miscategorized in the first place.

The last five-chaptered story I mentioned was partly miscategorized. Three parts were in Mind Control and two were in Non-erotic. The whole thing should have been one Non-erotic story, because there was no sex at all, except that some guys were talking about sex.

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

The last five-chaptered story I mentioned was partly miscategorized. Three parts were in Mind Control and two were in Non-erotic. The whole thing should have been one Non-erotic story, because there was no sex at all, except that some guys were talking about sex.

Yes, I know.

 

[sr71plt]

The rules have been revamped extensively for 2009. Considering you don't have a horse in the race, I'm not sure why you are complaining.

In the end, any changes to a participants submissions (ie, categories) are made by the site owners, not by the moderators. We can only forward our suggestions to them. They make the final decision.

Oh, and just to add this: Some of the griping about the "non-stand alone" chapters might be moot anyway considering that many of them are miscategorized in the first place.

Of course I have a horse in the race--the Survivor's Contest not only contributes heavily to the tit-high glop of half-baked story segments being poured onto this story list, which both is a large cause of readers complaining of having a hard time finding the gold in the crap and bogs down the submissions timing for the rest of us, but it also heightens the tension and bickering around here appreciably and it denies Web site funding of neglected contest themes and exercise that would actually help in the development of writers rather than encourage them to write crap and scheme against and yammer at each other as the Survivor Contest does. I have a horse in the race of making the Web site regain its reputation for quality offerings and of not having to wade through all of this juvenile bickering that's going on on the forum because of this "contest."

If you can't see the all around damage being done by this contest to the greater interests of authors contributing stories to this Web site, you're sitting too close to your baby and have your ears and eyes closed.

As Obama says, it's beyond time for a change and a new direction.

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

As Obama says, it's beyond time for a change and a new direction.

Which is what is being attempted with the revision to the 2009 contest.

And I can guarantee this contest is not the sole cause of "crappy" stories being piled onto this site. The number of contributing participants is a drop in the bucket of the total number of authors who submit stories to this site each year.

And just because someone participates in this contest also does not mean what they write is crap. Certain authors aside... the majority of the top placers for this contest since the time it began had numerous stories rated 4.50 or higher. I think most people will agree that it's one or two who have ruined this year's contest and not the majority of the participants nor the contest itself.

 

[michchick98]

Yes, I see that. But that isn't the type of rule you put in a legitimate contest. The rules should be set as soon as the contest starts. If you find rules need to change, you change them for the next running (or you stop the contest dead and start all over again)--but you don't start changing what can be submitted midstream after it has been legitimately submitted under rules existing at the time it was submitted--and you certainly don't make changes and only list them somewhere on the side rather than recasting the official rule document.

Just about any contest or sweepstakes where I've read the rules has had a 'rules subject to change without notice' disclaimer within them. It's a CYA kinda thing, I'm sure, but I'm also guessing, for the purposes of THIS site, that's why these threads are here. If there is a rule change and if someone is unclear as to what the rule changes may be, then they simply need to look at the survivor threads.

Yeah, there's a lot of off-topic stuff here, but the Search This Thread tool does a good job at narrowing down what someone might need to find. And there's always the option of PMing the moderators, as it also clearly states in the rules.

Anyone participating should be keeping themselves abreast of the rules, even the 'rules subject to change without notice' rule. Instead, it seems there are some with little to no reading comprehension skills.

Many authors have submitted multi-chapter stories for the contest, many are not stand-alone also. I don't see any of them crying foul.

Sorry, but this is really screwy and has, I think, helped lead (there are other contributing factors) to this contest being much more of a debit than a benefit for the Web site and its authors. Which is only made worse by connecting money--and therefore greed and rampant screwing around with the quality of what is posted to this story site and bickering--to it.

I think bickering will occur everywhere, even here, regardless of contests. I've been considering participating in Survivor next year, with no hopes or aspirations to even come close to placing even in the top ten. I just want to see if I can broaden my own horizons a bit and joining the Survivor contest will help to nudge me in that direction.

I'd bet there are a lot of authors who feel the same. Perhaps with the revamping of the rules for 2009, and making it clear BEFORE the contest starts, what's to be expected (and updating or reminding people of the rules and/or changes throughout the year) will help to keep the bickering and accusations to a minimum.

I suggest ditching this and starting fresh with some other approach. We are at the beginning of a year, where this could be done.

There's one day left for this year's Survivor contest, kinda pointless to start fresh for the 2008 conest now. And there's already a Survivor 2009 thread started, stating the rules for the contest, or did you miss that?

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

There's one day left for this year's Survivor contest, kinda pointless to start fresh for the 2008 conest now. And there's already a Survivor 2009 thread started, stating the rules for the contest, or did you miss that?

I think he means get rid of the contest completely and do something else.

 

[sr71plt]

Which is what is being attempted with the revision to the 2009 contest.

And I can guarantee this contest is not the sole cause of "crappy" stories being piled onto this site. The number of contributing participants is a drop in the bucket of the total number of authors who submit stories to this site each year.

And just because someone participates in this contest also does not mean what they write is crap. Certain authors aside... the majority of the top placers for this contest since the time it began had numerous stories rated 4.50 or higher. I think most people will agree that it's one or two who have ruined this year's contest and not the majority of the participants nor the contest itself.

Survivor doesn't have to be the sole cause of crappy stories, now does it? Let's sit out a year and then we can have a discussion on how much dross it contributed.

Rating 4.5 or higher on this site is no index to story quality, unfortunately.

No, just participated in the contest doesn't mean the author writes crap. Doesn't cut down on the actual manure pile being built by Survivor, though--and most certainly a contest based on quanity is not the writing development tool people say they enter this contest to sharpen--quite the opposite.

Again, I propose dropping the contest for at least a year--this being the best time to do that--and provide some more smaller speciality contests--category only contests, writing from a set scenario or from an image, using a common literary device (like a mirror, as is being discussed on the forum), doing something common with a writing element like voice (the best of second person stories, perhaps) themes less tired than are provided here in the special contests year in and year out with little change. You know, things that actually relate to writing development rather than numbers of word run-ons that meet minimum volume requirements.

The Survivor contest is dragging the Web site down in creativity, quality, and author interaction.

Beyond that, isn't it time that the few folks regularly participating in this contest (probably not too many using lots of different names) give up their comfortable (and profitable) little baliwick to let some air and creativity in here and have contests that will entice some others to put their fingers on their keyboards?

Or are you too defensive and invested to take a creativity time out?

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

Beyond that, isn't it time that the few folks regularly participating in this contest (probably not too many using lots of different names) give up their comfortable (and profitable) little baliwick to let some air and creativity in here and have contests that will entice some others to put their fingers on their keyboards?

Or are you too defensive anbd invested to take a creativity time out?

I've already taken a year off from participating in the writing part. As far as I'm aware 2008 was Erin & Karenna's first year to participate. In fact, the only person that I know of that has repeatedly taken one of the top prizes is jstherra in all his forms. All of the rest have been taken by different people each year. And when I say top prizes, I mean the top 3 since that's where the big money is.

Anyone who enters this contest has an equal chance of winning. The new rules for 2009 will hopefully make it even more fair and balanced.

I'm curious to know why you've decided all of the sudden on the eve the new contest year to start complaining. The plotting and planning thread went up a month ago. Where were you then?

 

[Selena_Kitt]

Someone suggested starting a petition to get rid of the whole thing this year. I'm not sure a "break" would be a bad idea. But it isn't my site, or my rules... *shrug*

I suppose we'll see what 2009 brings, with the new rule changes!

 

[Boxlicker101]

Survivor doesn't have to be the sole cause of crappy stories, now does it? Let's sit out a year and then we can have a discussion on how much dross it contributed.

Rating 4.5 or higher on this site is no index to story quality, unfortunately.

No, just participated in the contest doesn't mean the author writes crap. Doesn't cut down on the actual manure pile being built by Survivor, though--and most certainly a contest based on quanity is not the writing development tool people say they enter this contest to sharpen--quite the opposite.

Again, I propose dropping the contest for at least a year--this being the best time to do that--and provide some more smaller speciality contests--category only contests, writing from a set scenario or from an image, using a common literary device (like a mirror, as is being discussed on the forum), doing something common with a writing element like voice (the best of second person stories, perhaps) themes less tired than are provided here in the special contests year in and year out with little change. You know, things that actually relate to writing development rather than numbers of word run-ons that meet minimum volume requirements.

The Survivor contest is dragging the Web site down in creativity, quality, and author interaction.

Beyond that, isn't it time that the few folks regularly participating in this contest (probably not too many using lots of different names) give up their comfortable (and profitable) little baliwick to let some air and creativity in here and have contests that will entice some others to put their fingers on their keyboards?

Or are you too defensive and invested to take a creativity time out?

I have participated every year since 2003, which is when I joined up. I enjoy doing it, but it has no effect on the quality, or lack of same of my stories or poems. They are still mostly just smut, with no socially redeming qualities. Personally, I would prefer to have the contest continue, but I am also appalled at the low quality of some of the stories being posted and counted toward scores.

 

[sr71plt]

Why isn't this a good time to bring the proposal back up (as Selena says, it's been suggested several times throughout the year--perhaps it was something you just didn't want to hear)? This is a period of change from one contest year to another. I have mentioned it before myself--as have others. Why do you think this isn't a good time to bring it up?

I'm not surprised, though, that you would not want to consider the wisdom of at least taking a hiatus from the contest to clear the air (and if you haven't noticed how much this has fouled the air around here . . .). There's always the distinct possibility that once suspended, the damage it is doing will be quite obvious to everyone.

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

Why isn't this a good time to bring the proposal back up (as Selena says, it's been suggested several times throughout the year--perhaps it was something you just didn't want to hear)? This is a period of change from one contest year to another. I have mentioned it before myself--as have others. Why do you think this isn't a good time to bring it up?

I'm not surprised, though, that you would not want to consider the wisdom of at least taking a hiatus from the contest to clear the air (and if you haven't noticed how much this has fouled the air around here . . .). There's always the distinct possibility that once suspended, the damage it is doing will be quite obvious to everyone.

You didn't answer my question as to why you didn't come to the plotting and planning thread and put forth your suggestions there? Instead you wait until the day the 2009 Rules & Registration thread has already been posted.

And you're misquoting Selena. She didn't say "suggested several times throughout the year". That's your wording.

Why don't I want to take a year's hiatus? Because honestly, I don't want to give BFW the satisfaction of ruining the contest for future participants. Let's get real here. If it wasn't for BFW, none of these posts would even be here right now. No one would be suggesting we "take a break". But because one nutjob has made it his crusade to rant and rave and take the fun out of it, you want to let that fold the entire competition.

Hopefully, the new rules in place will curb some of the "dross" you feel is caused by this competition. Hopefully, BFW will keep his word and not participate this year and maybe just leave us the hell alone. Sure, some people join for the money. That's always going to happen when you've got money up for grabs. However, there are many that join for the challenge. With the new rules, the contest should be more challenging than ever. And if 2009 goes down in flames like 2008 has... then maybe we should discuss a complete revamp or removal of the competition. But I say, give it another year. Let's take a chance on the new rules and see where they lead.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You didn't answer my question as to why you didn't come to the plotting and planning thread and put forth your suggestions there? Instead you wait until the day the 2009 Rules & Registration thread has already been posted.

And you're misquoting Selena. She didn't say "suggested several times throughout the year". That's your wording.

Why don't I want to take a year's hiatus? Because honestly, I don't want to give BFW the satisfaction of ruining the contest for future participants. Let's get real here. If it wasn't for BFW, none of these posts would even be here right now. No one would be suggesting we "take a break". But because one nutjob has made it his crusade to rant and rave and take the fun out of it, you want to let that fold the entire competition.

Hopefully, the new rules in place will curb some of the "dross" you feel is caused by this competition. Hopefully, BFW will keep his word and not participate this year and maybe just leave us the hell alone. Sure, some people join for the money. That's always going to happen when you've got money up for grabs. However, there are many that join for the challenge. With the new rules, the contest should be more challenging than ever. And if 2009 goes down in flames like 2008 has... then maybe we should discuss a complete revamp or removal of the competition. But I say, give it another year. Let's take a chance on the new rules and see where they lead.

I certainly wouldn't count on BFW keeping his word. How often has he said something about not posting any more, and continued his ranting unabated?

Personally, it would be nice to win money, but I don't actually expect that to happen. I am definitely not going to change any of my habits to help bring it about. I will continue constructing smutty stories, with the occasional gentle tale of romance.

 

[sr71plt]

You didn't answer my question as to why you didn't come to the plotting and planning thread and put forth your suggestions there? Instead you wait until the day the 2009 Rules & Registration thread has already been posted.

Why do you seem so threatened? I don't follow the Survivor threads--I've long been appalled by this whole Byzantine, devisive, writer-damaging enterprise. I have no idea what the thread structure here is and don't see any rule that I can't put my comments on any forum thread that I want to. I latched onto this one because Freddie was posting after he said good-bye--and I was bored--and it seemed Freddie had a point or two that others were dancing around--and then Boxer had another interesting point that interested me too--and Freddie has ignored. I'll bet you came and started watching the thread closely then too. I haven't posted anything that doesn't logically follow on from this thread or is off the topic that was going when and where I opened the thread.

Again, why isn't this actually the most polite time to (re)suggest a change? (You haven't answered that question yourself). It's as the 2008 contest is winding down and before a 2009 contest officially starts.

Regardless, I brought it up now and think this is one of the better times to bring it up, and concentrating on timing rather substance seems just panicked diversionary tactics to me.

And you're misquoting Selena. She didn't say "suggested several times throughout the year". That's your wording.

Are you trying to throw flak up in the air on that too? What's the big difference in Selena saying "a petition" and me saying several times? Fine with me if you want to credit her with "petition" and me with "several times." Have at it. It has, in fact, been brought up several times this year. The petition idea was only one. What substantive fallacy have I made here on this issue? (And, incidentally, when the petition idea came up, I don't think I either commented or said I'd sign one--so it ain't just me, toots.)

Shall we have the shells whisk around on the table top again? I assure you I've said my piece--and assumed there are those too invested to think of the good of the Web site.

 

[sr71plt]

Hey, I have a compromise idea. Cancel the money. I'm sure it would improve the situation appreciably. Isn't that a sterling idea?

 

[KarennaC]

Crim is right, this was my first year participating. I plan to participate again next year, though. I'm more motivated to write when there's some sort of challenge to it, and self-imposed challenges don't work as well for me.

 

[CrimsonMaiden]

Why do you seem so threatened? I don't follow the Survivor threads--I've long been appalled by this whole Byzantine, devisive, writer-damaging enterprise. I have no idea what the thread structure here is and don't see any rule that I can't put my comments on any forum thread that I want to. I latched onto this one because Freddie was posting after he said good-bye--and I was bored--and it seemed Freddie had a point or two that others were dancing around--and then Boxer had another interesting point that interested me too--and Freddie has ignored. I'll bet you came and started watching the thread closely then too. I haven't posted anything that doesn't logically follow on from this thread or is off the topic that was going when and where I opened the thread.

Again, why isn't this actually the most polite time to (re)suggest a change? (You haven't answered that question yourself). It's as the 2008 contest is winding down and before a 2009 contest officially starts.

Regardless, I brought it up now and think this is one of the better times to bring it up, and concentrating on timing rather substance seems just panicked diversionary tactics to me.



Are you trying to throw flak up in the air on that too? What's the big difference in Selena saying "a petition" and me saying several times? Fine with me if you want to credit her with "petition" and me with "several times." Have at it. It has, in fact, been brought up several times this year. The petition idea was only one. What substantive fallacy have I made here on this issue? (And, incidentally, when the petition idea came up, I don't think I either commented or said I'd sign one--so it ain't just me, toots.)

Shall we have the shells whisk around on the table top again? I assure you I've said my piece--and assumed there are those too invested to think of the good of the Web site.

I'm not threatened. I just don't like people who think their way is the only way. You don't seem to even want to give things a chance to improve. You're ready to throw the whole thing away without even giving the new rule structure a chance, and you come across as though (whether it's your intention or not) because you think the contest is horrible, then everyone else must think the same thing, and it must be true. Why am I so invested? Because I've participated for several years, and I put a huge amount of time and effort into moderating 2008 and have already begun said effort for the 2009 contest.

Why isn't this a good time? Because you've had a month to make your suggestions. There was a reason the 2009 plotting and planning thread was created. A month's worth of effort had already been put forth into refining the rules for 2009, modifying the rules post, and posting multiple threads in prep for the 2009 contest, which Laurel, the site owner green-lighted immediately before the plotting and planning thread was created. However, you want to swoop in the day before the contest officially starts and say "Let's shut it down!"

Obviously, the site owners do not feel so strongly about the detriment of this contest to their site or they wouldn't be approving the 2009 contest along with adding a version for the Poets.

I honestly don't have a problem with cutting back on the prizes, but I wouldn't want to do away with them altogether. I do like the fact that more people are rewarded than there used to be. It was only the top 3 (I believe). Then it either went to the top 5 and then the top 15 or jumped straight to the top 15.

The bottom line is, regardless of some of the rotten apples that have tried to ruin the fun, I believe in the contest and want to see it succeed, and I'm willing to go the distance to give it the chance it deserves.

Oh, and I watch all of the threads on this form all of the time... regardless of whether I post or not. I don't just jump over here when BFW shows up. It's part of my duty as a moderator.

 

[starrkers]

Hello! Hope that merry Christmases were had by everyone and that happy New Years are on the way.

I'm back home, finally. I'm still going through all the posts I missed, trying to catch up, but let me just say this. Literotica is based on San Diego, which I assume is why PST has been the timezone of reference for the rules from times immemorial, but the actual servers that host the Literotica main site are somewhere on the East Coast. Posting is done automatically shortly after midnight, so the cut-off time for posting should be midnight EST. Don't count on any submissions made after then to be posted on time, and it's the posting date that counts, unless Laurel is able to confirm that the submission was made before midnight EST.

THanks Lauren, and welcome back.
Sorry if I sound particularly obtuse on this point, but would it be possible in the rules to add the GMT offset to the timezones?
Anything I post, either on the boards or submissions, is time and date stamped for my timezone (GMT +10). I have several poems that posted in the last 12 hours that are dated December 31. I have one pending that has a post date of January 1, I'm assuming it will go up this afternoon my time. But it becomes quite confusing trying to figure out where (even what day for me) cutoffs for competitions apply.

 

[starrkers]

Why isn't this a good time to bring the proposal back up (as Selena says, it's been suggested several times throughout the year--perhaps it was something you just didn't want to hear)? This is a period of change from one contest year to another. I have mentioned it before myself--as have others. Why do you think this isn't a good time to bring it up?

I'm not surprised, though, that you would not want to consider the wisdom of at least taking a hiatus from the contest to clear the air (and if you haven't noticed how much this has fouled the air around here . . .). There's always the distinct possibility that once suspended, the damage it is doing will be quite obvious to everyone.

Why do you seem so threatened? I don't follow the Survivor threads--I've long been appalled by this whole Byzantine, devisive, writer-damaging enterprise. I have no idea what the thread structure here is and don't see any rule that I can't put my comments on any forum thread that I want to. I latched onto this one because Freddie was posting after he said good-bye--and I was bored--and it seemed Freddie had a point or two that others were dancing around--and then Boxer had another interesting point that interested me too--and Freddie has ignored. I'll bet you came and started watching the thread closely then too. I haven't posted anything that doesn't logically follow on from this thread or is off the topic that was going when and where I opened the thread.

Again, why isn't this actually the most polite time to (re)suggest a change? (You haven't answered that question yourself). It's as the 2008 contest is winding down and before a 2009 contest officially starts.

Regardless, I brought it up now and think this is one of the better times to bring it up, and concentrating on timing rather substance seems just panicked diversionary tactics to me.



Are you trying to throw flak up in the air on that too? What's the big difference in Selena saying "a petition" and me saying several times? Fine with me if you want to credit her with "petition" and me with "several times." Have at it. It has, in fact, been brought up several times this year. The petition idea was only one. What substantive fallacy have I made here on this issue? (And, incidentally, when the petition idea came up, I don't think I either commented or said I'd sign one--so it ain't just me, toots.)

Shall we have the shells whisk around on the table top again? I assure you I've said my piece--and assumed there are those too invested to think of the good of the Web site.

You've missed the boat sr. The time for this discussion was a month or more ago, when the plotting and planning thread was active.

For someone who doesn't follow Survivor, you seem to have a very strong opinion on its veracity as a contest.

May I suggest keep a weather eye on it and joining the discussion at the appropriate time (late October/November) in 2009? I know, that means another year of "damage" to the site, but seeing as that doesn't seem to worry Laurel (who is the ultimate arbiter), it can't be that great a factor.

 

[sr71plt]

You've missed the boat sr. The time for this discussion was a month or more ago, when the plotting and planning thread was active.

For someone who doesn't follow Survivor, you seem to have a very strong opinion on its veracity as a contest.

May I suggest keep a weather eye on it and joining the discussion at the appropriate time (late October/November) in 2009? I know, that means another year of "damage" to the site, but seeing as that doesn't seem to worry Laurel (who is the ultimate arbiter), it can't be that great a factor.

As I already noted, I commented on it at the point in which I was attracted to a discussion that led into it. I didn't lay in wait to attack. I haven't expended hours of seething over this. (As I noted, when the discussion of petitioning to get rid of it came up, I didn't weigh in at all.) And I think the "why now?" question is just a lame diversionary ploy anyway. There's no reason why we can't discuss this whenever. I don't believe those with vested interest in this would ever acknowledge a good time to discuss it.

Yes, I have strong feelings about the contest. I'm a professional writer and editor. The contest is destructive of writing development--promoting bad writing habits, bad behavior, and greed--and as I already posted, it has a whole bunch of nastiness and small-group denial of opportunites for others going for it that impinge on what the rest of the authors on this Web site are trying to do. You aren't only affected by it if you are signed up to participate in it. I've already given a list on that.

It's just spiraling everything down. And it didn't just start going down in 2008, either. The argument of "not giving it a chance" is specious and diversionary too.

Just a shell game going on to fend off any discussion of it. Which will work a charm, though, of course.

 

[starrkers]

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, sr, merely pointing out your timing was off if you hope your comments to have any impact.

 

[sr71plt]

I wasn't trying to pick a fight, sr, merely pointing out your timing was off if you hope your comments to have any impact.

Thanks. I don't want to fight over this, either. It's . . . just . . . so . . . obvious that this contest needs to be ditched--for multiple reasons. And, yes, I know that there isn't a chance it will be. Doesn't mean that "that which must be said" shouldn't be aired.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Hello! I would like to point out that there was no rule changed midway as far as 2008 was concerned. It was simply reaffirmed, like it had been the previous year, that any stories that couldn't stand on its own or with content inadequate to the category they were posted in would be reported to Laurel with a suggestion they be moved to a category that better represents the stories in question. That's not a change of rules, and it has happened the year before as well.