Quoted from FrankM WHO: Characters WHAT: Script WHERE: Earth WHY: To entertain readers HOW: Up to the writer

My thoughts, exactly!

well, better or worse, I voted.    I will say that I voted for the one I felt was written the best.  It's in the lead right now.  However we don't know the show etc.

My guess

Who woman President elect.
What her attempted assassination
Why repeal of the second amendment
When 2028, just after the election results.
How by child

That's my guess and what I based the vote on.

Dan

Quoted from FrankM WHO: Characters WHAT: Script WHERE: Earth WHY: To entertain readers HOW: Up to the writer

I think the key is the topic.  There’s got to be something you can compare against.

The parameters shouldn't matter to us.

Most Producers are aware of artistic licence and interpretation. The way we interpret parameters will all be different. The readers shouldn't be the ones policing this, that is down to the organiser(s).

A producer will not throw a great script out because it doesn't match what they specifically asked for... and the readers/viewers don't have anything to do with that process at all. It's their/our job to simply enjoy it... or not.

That said, I do think my own script should have been disqualified. Was I being paid, I wouldn't have been able to avoid the 'haunted' aspect the way I did in this tournament. Again though, it is down to the organisers to police that, not us.

This sounds like you'd want Sean to decide instead of us voters.

That said, the script/contest should include aliens but the great script didn't include aliens.  You should vote for the one following the parameters.  Even though it's the weaker script.  It's what the producer wanted/requested.

Sounds like? I was very clear. The organiser(s) should be the ones to police the scripts and decide what does and what doesn't fit the criteria they set. Even if we want to vote the poorly-adhered script better, then it is still down to the organisers to decide whether the script should go through, or put the weaker script through that met the criteria.

What's far more likely to happen in a real scenario, is that the better writer will be asked to rewrite and the weaker writer and their script will be brushed aside, even though it was more what they wanted.

That's all fine and dandy.  But as voters.  And we can only get involved as voters.  We should be fair.

So unless we know everything, then no one should vote until this is revealed:

This is where the fun part (hopefully. I have no clue what constitutes fun) comes in. Only the writers will know what the script topic is until the scripts are released. When the voting finally opens, the readers will, then, know what the topic actually was (if they haven't figured it out by then).

Quoted from jayrex That's all fine and dandy.  But as voters.  And we can only get involved as voters.  We should be fair.

We're being asked to vote on the story we liked the best, not what story best matched the parameters set by the organisers.

This is meant to be fun for us and a headache for the organisers. That's how this shit works. Why make things more difficult for yourself? Surely you have better uses for your time?

Quoted from DustinBowcot We're being asked to vote on the story we liked the best, not what story best matched the parameters set by the organisers.

If we're told to disregard the parameters set for this round and go with what we like, I'll go with the flow.  But seems odd to even have a competition and not use any guidance in place.  It would be just your standard run of a mill script we can read from any section.

I just want to be fair.  That can't be a bad thing can it?

Well, due to inclement weather, my golf match got cancelled this morning leaving time for diatribe so thought I would weigh in.  

Let organizers Decide Who Met the Parameters.

Ideally that would be great. However, in practical terms, it's never going to happen. Most OWCs have 30 or so scripts. There is no way a single person is going to read through all of those, make a judgement on the degree to which they met the parameters, write up their reasons for DQ, etc.  

Readers Just Make Their Judgement Based on Script Quality

Okay - then why have parameters at all? Just have the rule be to submit a short within a week of the time a challenge is announced.

To answer my own question I think we have parameters because of the nature of the OWC - it's designed to be a one week challenge and ostensibly, parameters are established to prevent folks from just submitting any short they want (i.e., one they've been working on forever, one that they already have done, etc.).  

So - in my humble opinion. For future OWCS, either:

- Have parameters and announce them and let the readers decide whether or not their vote is tempered by the degree to which they think the writer met the parameters. Basically - the status quo.

- Eliminate the parameters other than the timeline - i.e., you have one week to submit a script.  Nobody is DQ'd, nobody has to have their vote influenced by the degree to which the parameters were met. Everything will be based on script quality.

- Don't do both - i.e. have strict parameters for the writers that you don't convey to the readers.

A third option and my personal preference (fro selfish reasons) is to have simple themed based OWCs. e.g.,

- Better to have loved and lost then not to have loved at all.
- Greed is Good
- Haste Makes Waste
- No Good deed goes unpunished
- etc, etc.  

Lose requirements regarding genre, page count, budget, plot points, et al.

That would allow writers to engage in more commercially viable projects, write more of what they enjoy writing, increase the emphasis on script quality vs. rule compliance, increase the reward for the readers (i.e., I think we would get to read higher quality/more diverse scripts).
On the down side, it wouldn't really be a ONE WEEK challenge as folks could easily submit stuff they've been working on for awhile - For me personally, I wiuld take the trade off.

Quoted from eldave1 Let organizers Decide Who Met the Parameters. Ideally that would be great. However, in practical terms, it's never going to happen. Most OWCs have 30 or so scripts. There is no way a single person is going to read through all of those, make a judgement on the degree to which they met the parameters, write up their reasons for DQ, etc.

They don't need to do that until after the vote. So a script that doesn't meet the parameters may come first in the vote but then is later disqualified.

Quoted Text Readers Just Make Their Judgement Based on Script Quality Okay - then why have parameters at all? Just have the rule be to submit a short within a week of the time a challenge is announced.

The parameters make the challenge more worthwhile as they add an element of fun. If a writer chooses not to follow the parameters then we as readers shouldn't dwell on that, and should rather vote for the best story. Voting for a weaker story that we enjoyed less just because it met the parameters and the other didn't doesn't sit right with me. I'd be far happier voting for the best story and then see it disqualified by the organisers for breaking the rules.

If a great scriot doesn’t follow the rules, it won’t receive a good score from me.  I don’t like my time wasted.

I read an article by an engineer. He was talking about how parameters lead to great advancements. Say the Air Force orders a jet. They say: we need it to go X fast, X far and have X capability.

The engineer looks at the requirements and thinks: we've never built anything to go X fast, we don't have the technology.

But, if they want the contract, they are forced to invent new technology to meet the parameters. Many times, they're able. But, if they never were asked to do it, they may never have invented the new tech. Or, it might have taken many more years to reach the same breakthrough.

I look at the script parameters the same way. This contest, and its crazy parameters, forced me to be more creative. Lord knows, I would never have written an egg-based superhero story if it weren't for the contest. (Bad example, as I probably still should never have written an egg-based superhero story.)

Point is, from my view, parameters make the contest. They force us to find solutions to crazy problems. They lead to creative breakthroughs.

This contest has even made me think about ways to incorporate "boxing myself in, writing myself out" to my writing.