Control by 0 - Short, Thriller - A CIA agent with a questionable past is called in to help his soon-to-be-president wife through an election night threat. 11 pages - pdf, format

OR:

...Shall Be Infringed by 0 - Short, Drama, Thriller - The story behind the repeal of the second amendment.  18 pages - pdf, format

+++++++++++++++++++
The Parameters


Who: Hitman.
What: Has to keep a Presidential candidate, his estranged wife, alive.
Where: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
When: Tuesday, November 7th, 2028 (election day).
Why: A hit has been put out on her to stop gun control legislation she intends to pass.

I am lost.

1. Do we just click one or the other?

2. What happened to posting the parameters?

Dave - top left, there's a Voting window, or did you mean something else?

Quoted from AnthonyCawood Dave - top left, there's a Voting window, or did you mean something else?

Thought they were posting the script criteria

Yeah, think people ought to know the parameters before voting.

So no excellent, very good, etc.  just which script did you like better?

How long do people have to vote?

Quoted from PKCardinal Yeah, think people ought to know the parameters before voting.

Agree. I thought they should have been posted earlier. I lost that argument because  they were going to be posted before the vote.  Totally lost here.  Oh well - good luck Paul

Good luck to you, too, Dave.

Can someone post the parameters?

Quoted from LC Can someone post the parameters?

I'd like to, but I don't want to step on anyone's toes.

Quoted from LC Can someone post the parameters?

Libby - this was the response when I asked about posting the parameters before the reads:

Quoted Text No, the readers shouldn't know what the topic is before reading. If it wouldn't have been a nightmare beforehand, I would have stuck with this rule for the entire tournament. The idea is that I want people to read the script for content, first and foremost. Then, they can judge it on how it followed the rules. The most important thing should always be script quality.

So, I assumed "judge" meant vote - ergo peeps would know the parameters before voting. That is obviously not the case and, being in the thing, I'm not really in a position to post the criteria since I can only assume now that they wanted the readers to vote without knowing the parameters (I think). I certainly will post it once the voting closes if it isn't posted before hand.

"The parameters are obvious and both of you stuck to the parameters real well."

Am I wrong here?

Quoted from khamanna "The parameters are obvious and both of you stuck to the parameters real well." Am I wrong here?

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

Quoted from eldave1 Libby - this was the response when I asked about posting the parameters before the reads: So, I assumed "judge" meant vote - ergo peeps would know the parameters before voting. That is obviously not the case and, being in the thing, I'm not really in a position to post the criteria since I can only assume now that they wanted the readers to vote without knowing the parameters (I think). I certainly will post it once the voting closes if it isn't posted before hand.

Hmm, yep, that's what I thought too. Know the parameters before voting. And yes, we've been able to guess a lot but I would have liked to have seen them before casting my vote - which I'm yet to do. Not wanting to complain, just would have been interesting.

I'm gonna hold off for a bit.
Thanks Dave.

P.S. I note Sean's comment on script quality being the most important criteria for voting.
Okedoke.

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.

For me it depends on a parameter:

If a parameter calls for a five pager and the script is 6-page long - I'll mark it down for it.
If a parameter says the scripts need to end with "these exact words" - I'd want to see "these exact words" at the end and I'll mark the script down if it doesn't follow the rules.

But some parameters get loose interpretation by writers through no fault of their own. For the first round, I wrote a ghost script. The parameter called for sci-fi. I immediately thought that ghost already means a sci-fi. I asked Sean and he said yes, it does. He even gave me a few examples of the movies. So, I thought if two of us think that then it must be true. I did think SSers might object but this thought occured to me only after I finished writing.
Same goes for other genres. Like comedy - some people might see a script as funny, others will not.
My point is some parameters call for various interpretations.  

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

I very much agree with it.

I haven't been on the site long enough to witness too many OWC's, but I think a mix of explicit and squishy parameters allows for creativity to shine through. Bonus points if they comport with what one might find on a real writing assignment.

Explicit requirements like page counts and ludicrously specific settings (i.e., trapped in an automobile, one character never tells the truth, etc.) put some structure around the challenge even if they serve no other purpose than to ensure no one is dusting off an old script. They're also part of the fun of achieving the "impossible."

Squishy requirements (i.e., a parable about haste makes waste, a skeptic is confronted by the paranormal, etc.) allow the writers to explore in and around a theme, give the contestants freedom, but also make the scripts comparable.

Quoted from DustinBowcot 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. 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.

Not sure that is ever going to happen - i.e., organizers looking at scripts for parameter compliance. Who knows.

Don't agree with your 2nd point. I would dwell on whether they met the parameters or not as it is what level the playing field. If one writer follows them and the other doesn't - then how can you simply vote for the best story? You may just be voting for something that's been in the can for a year while the other writer had to write something under a one week constraint - apples and oranges.

PS - not applicable to this current round as obviously both writers captured the same basic themes and both obviously wrote them specifically for this challenge. But when you got 30 or so entries and are not going to hold folks accountable for the parameters - then I just don't get the
premise of the OWC - it would just be a short challenge

But I haven't said that folks shouldn't be held accountable for not sticking to the parameters. I have said the opposite. I just don't think it is down to us to do the accounting.

The length of time the scripts are up gives Sean (or whoever) plenty of time to check for compliance. Plenty of us here manage to read all of them. If a script manages to sneak through with a loose interpretation of the parameters then it shouldn't be a bone of contention for the readers. This type of misconception can lose legitimate scripts votes.

Quoted from DustinBowcot But I haven't said that folks shouldn't be held accountable for not sticking to the parameters. I have said the opposite. I just don't think it is down to us to do the accounting. The length of time the scripts are up gives Sean (or whoever) plenty of time to check for compliance. Plenty of us here manage to read all of them. If a script manages to sneak through with a loose interpretation of the parameters then it shouldn't be a bone of contention for the readers. This type of misconception can lose legitimate scripts votes.

yeah, I know what your point was. And if someone work going to review the scripts for compliance, then we're on the same page. I just don't think that's going to happen

I've added the parameters:

Who: Hitman.
What: Has to keep a Presidential candidate, his estranged wife, alive.
Where: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
When: Tuesday, November 7th, 2028 (election day).
Why: A hit has been put out on her to stop gun control legislation she intends to pass.

Quoted from Don I've added the parameters: Who: Hitman. What: Has to keep a Presidential candidate, his estranged wife, alive. Where: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. When: Tuesday, November 7th, 2028 (election day). Why: A hit has been put out on her to stop gun control legislation she intends to pass.

Thanks Don!

That's cleared that up.  Both scripts stuck to the parameters.  Control was my fav out of the two.

Quoted from eldave1 I just don't think that's going to happen

It already happens. I cannot pinpoint an exact example, but I'm pretty sure scripts have been disqualified before for not fitting the parameters.

Why do the members feel the need to police this? Why can't we just read the script and say whether we enjoyed it or preferred it over another and leave it at that?

Why the need to take fun so seriously?

Quoted from DustinBowcot It already happens. I cannot pinpoint an exact example, but I'm pretty sure scripts have been disqualified before for not fitting the parameters.

I seem to recall one as well - again, can't pinpoint it but I recall something like that happened. But, that's anecdotal and not indicative of whether moderators routinely do this. I can't imagine that they do given the volume of scripts typically entered. Again - we are not disagreeing on an ideal approach - just disagreeing on whether it is a practical approach.

Quoted Text Why do the members feel the need to police this? Why can't we just read the script and say whether we enjoyed it or preferred it over another and leave it at that?

I'll answer the question with a question - why can't we allow both? In past OWCs I have DQ'd scripts from my vote because I did not think they were close to the parameters. Other peeps did not because they thought they were close enough. What's the problem with letting each reader decide how they want to approach it?

Quoted Text Why the need to take fun so seriously?

"Fun" and rules are not mutually exclusive. You play chess - if your opponent starts playing checkers midway through the match - the fun is over. I play tournament poker - if someone says during the game that threes are not the highest card in the deck - then my fun is over.

Yes - fun is paramount. The existence of rules does not undermine that. They undermine anarchy.

And again - I'm cool with OWC with no parameters - but if you're going to have them - have them.

Quoted from Don I've added the parameters: Who: Hitman. What: Has to keep a Presidential candidate, his estranged wife, alive. Where: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. When: Tuesday, November 7th, 2028 (election day). Why: A hit has been put out on her to stop gun control legislation she intends to pass.

What? No shiny black limo?

Quoted from JEStaats What? No shiny black limo?

Also note that no one said the goodguy hitman or the badguy hitman had to use guns. I've never seen a script for an extended martial arts action scene, but it could have been interesting.

Jet Li (his character has a name, but no one remembers what it is) performs several minutes of overly elaborate martial arts moves, ends with punching Henchman Five.

Wasn't in love with either but I wanted to like Shall Be Infringed. Very well written. Knowing the parameters after the read make it a little clearer looking back though I still think the script has flaws. If the concept was fleshed out a little it could easily be a full length feature.

What is the time frame for voting?

Since the poll is visible, I presume the Who Wrote What and the star-studded Hollywood award ceremony would follow almost immediately.

My pick was for Control. I wrote out some notes for each last night but was too tired to make sense. The short version: if I was picking based on difficulty level/ambition, I'd go with Shall Be Infringed. But, for me, Control is the more enjoyable read by a wide margin. It kept a brisk pace with some twists and turns.

The narration really hurt Infringed. Felt like a feature worth of material crammed into eighteen pages (I can relate). Maybe you could pull this off as a short under less restrictive conditions. I think the narrator needs to take a backseat at some point. Perhaps open with Jeremiah being taken hostage and use flashbacks to fill in the backstory? Dual timeline?

Some tough parameters though. Both of you did well. The real question is will Sean recover or forever roam the halls of that mental hospital scribbling tournament brackets on the wall?  

Is voting still ongoing?

Just curious.

Quoted from LC Just curious.

That'll explain the question mark at the end of the previous sentence.

Maybe Sean wants the whole thing just to fade out.

Quoted from khamanna Maybe Sean wants the whole thing just to fade out.

It has been awhile

The final countdown...tick-tock tick-tock... it's a close finish. Who has yet to vote that may turn the tide?

Imagine if Sean had to be the tie-breaker after all this!

Quoted from JEStaats The final countdown...tick-tock tick-tock... it's a close finish. Who has yet to vote that may turn the tide? Imagine if Sean had to be the tie-breaker after all this!

Well, when you see the usernames of a new group of identical octuplets FrankM_sockpuppet_1 through FrankM_sockpuppet_8, you'll know the vote tallies are going to get interesting...

Serious FYI: There is now a timer at the top of the site saying voting closes about 24 hours from now.

I just wanted to offer a sincere apology to everyone for this entire round, for not being around to discuss it. Long story short, I just got off having to do nine straight double shifts at work and I figuratively feel like I'm about to have a heart attack. I haven't caught up on the thread, yet,, but I saw that Don had mentioned the online poll thing and I see the timer has one more day left on it, so that's cool. I just want to thank everyone for bearing with this whole thing. =)

All good. Be careful with yourself right now. Dangerous to run yourself that low.

Quoted from PKCardinal All good. Be careful with yourself right now. Dangerous to run yourself that low.

When you have five people quit or be fired in a 4-day span... Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing the final results. =)

Quoted from Mr. Blonde When you have five people quit or be fired in a 4-day span... Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing the final results. =)

I got to experience something like that vicariously. I survived a round of layoffs but got snagged for jury duty. The two people doing six people’s work were not Happy Campers.

And this round has been awesome, with plenty of good discussion on the scripts, and just the hiccup on exactly when voting ends. You set this up very well, Sean. Just a shame you were too busy to enjoy everyone enjoying the challenge in real time.

To reiterate: take care of yourself!