Quoted from PrussianMosby Hey, I have a problem with my power adapter. It's been a while... I've driven around to fix it... and of course I got the people to fix it, two days from now. Anyway, I'm now at my mother's pc, ha, just wanted to let you know

Online blackout.   I know what that feels like. Mums can always be relied upon.

I'll comment on each script tomorrow (Wednesday).
My opinion: If a writer has made it to this round, he should be giving it his all in terms of story, story-telling, originality, and script formatting. This is not the round for such nicey comments as "Good job for only 48 hours" or "Many errors, but that's to be expected...."

Quoted from Stumpzian I'll comment on each script tomorrow (Wednesday). My opinion: If a writer has made it to this round, he should be giving it his all in terms of story, story-telling, originality, and script formatting. This is not the round for such nicey comments as "Good job for only 48 hours" or "Many errors, but that's to be expected...."

Not quite sure I get this Henry. I assume everybody gave it their all every round. And 48 hours is still 48 hours whether it's round 1 or round 5. I'll mull it over, but for me anyway what round it was did not bear any relevance to the writing

Quoted from Stumpzian That wasn't my point.

Got it. I misread your post

Quoted from eldave1 Not quite sure I get this Henry. I assume everybody gave it their all every round. And 48 hours is still 48 hours whether it's round 1 or round 5. I'll mull it over, but for me anyway what round it was did not bear any relevance to the writing

I don't assume anything.

Those that deny the keenest are often the biggest perpetrators.

Quoted from DustinBowcot Those that deny the keenest are often the biggest perpetrators.

Deny what?

I agree with you on the best script - and I know which one you're talking about as I read your comments - but saying everyone should think the same as I would be ..hmm... interesting to say the least. My opinion is just what it is - another opinion, nothing more than that.

Deny that opinions are swayed by other comments, and also deny they aren't swayed once they figure out who wrote what.

The best script in the present lineup is obvious. Anybody that thinks different isn't worth listening to.

Quoted from Stumpzian I don't assume anything.

And that wasn't my point.  I'll try a different tact.

Quoted Text My opinion: If a writer has made it to this round, he should be giving it his all in terms of story, story-telling, originality, and script formatting.

My opinion: The round is not relevant. The writer should have met the same - giving it all - standard in every round.

Quoted Text This is not the round for such nicey comments as "Good job for only 48 hours" or "Many errors, but that's to be expected....

My opinion. Actually do think the 48 hours should be considered as well as the parameters. Note obviously not really 48 hours - more like 5 or 6 hours since we all have lives, family, sleep. work, etc consuming that time as well. Regardless, I always judge the scripts (for all OWCs)  in the context of limited time and restrictive parameters).  As an example, IMO - all of these scripts would have been better if the action did not have to take place entirely in a car - I think the writers know that.  i.e., none of these scripts will reflect the writer's best work.  

Anyway - not a deal - we just have a different take on it.

Quoted from LC Okay. I can't speak for other writers, only for myself. I'm too opinionated to follow the herd. Ask my Ma, and my husband.

And, like the straying wildebeest - the ones the lions always get,  I'm too oblivious to follow the herd.

On to the point.

- I never read OWC comments before posting my own. I think they would influence me if I did so no need to be contaminated.

- I do read all the comments after I post. I am impacted by: if I thought a script was crap, and the majority loved it, I'll take another look to see if I just missed something, was in a pissy mood, etc. etc  when I read. On a few occasions that exercise did temper my view of a script and I think rightly so.  

- I do think who I know and like would impact my review - not saying that's a good thing, but I think that's just true in life - ergo - glad that these are anonymous.

I am confused by the lack of a voting process on this one.

In the last rounds we voted as we reviewed with the votes being finalized on Thursday night and the new parameters announced shortly after that to allow time for a script by Sunday night. i.e., peeps had four days to vote.

Is this one going to have a one day vote??? OR - are we extending a week?

Confused in Los Angeles.

Quoted from eldave1 And that wasn't my point.  I'll try a different tact. My opinion: The round is not relevant. The writer should have met the same - giving it all - standard in every round. My opinion. Actually do think the 48 hours should be considered as well as the parameters. Note obviously not really 48 hours - more like 5 or 6 hours since we all have lives, family, sleep. work, etc consuming that time as well. Regardless, I always judge the scripts (for all OWCs)  in the context of limited time and restrictive parameters).  As an example, IMO - all of these scripts would have been better if the action did not have to take place entirely in a car - I think the writers know that.  i.e., none of these scripts will reflect the writer's best work.   Anyway - not a deal - we just have a different take on it.

I agree.  It’s harsh to punish people for the obvious mistakes that creep through, 48hours is a tight timescale.  Even if no mistakes/errors are made, it’s not a done deal to pick one writer who wrote an average story that contains zero mistakes over another writer who had a good/great story that contains mistakes.

Expect mistakes, it’s a given.

Hmm. There's no scorecard.

Last time we were given 5 hours to fill out the scorecard at first. And then it changed to 5 days. I hope we have more than a few hours this time. Just want to make sure it finds me awake.

Regarding my earlier comments about expecting writers in this round to have given it their all in terms of story-telling, originality, and  producing a clean script:

It IS competition, after all. You deliver or you don't. You come up with the best you can and put it out there.

I, for one, almost never penalize competitors for minor mistakes. In my comments, you won't see lists of comma infractions or typos or upside-down periods. What I focus on is successful, original story-telling.  For example, in the alt-history OWC, Cameron's WWW II script was rough as a cob, as an old city editor of mine used to say. But I commented positively -- because of the story-telling -- and gave him high marks.

In this near-final round, though, I would expect cleaner scripts. I think it was Warren who said he read his script 30 times before submitting. You can't ask for more than that.

Story is key for me too. I don't penalise for typos formatting etc. either. I might mention some if they haven't already been noted ad infinitum - that gets boring fast and I know when I'm on the other end of it: Yes, I got that already!  If it's a real dog's brekky - 'rough as a cob'   (that a Southern expression?) it's likely the story will follow suit.

Upside down period.