TheReno, do you have a topic that you wish to challenge Ass with?

Si. I challenge him to write an Alternate History Action story. Just what it sounds like, an action story set in alternate universe where one of the huge events of our pasts had a diffrent outcome (Germany winning the war, Our economy failing instead of USSR, Romans staying a Republic with Caesar not being a dictator and them holding off the Huns etc.) Do you accept?

I liked to challenge someone, anyone.

At 2/23/10 07:49 PM, TheSubject666 wrote: I liked to challenge someone, anyone.

Let's say I agree to this challenge, what must I do?

At 2/23/10 07:59 PM, MaliciousAngel wrote:

At 2/23/10 07:49 PM, TheSubject666 wrote: I liked to challenge someone, anyone.

Let's say I agree to this challenge, what must I do?

I think we have to wait for the guy or ask someone else to start a thread . . . Anytime now . . .

Whomever is challenging someone needs to state a topic.

At 2/23/10 08:33 PM, Spindrift23 wrote: Whomever is challenging someone needs to state a topic.

Make a thread for my challenge?

I did not notice your second post, TheReno. Your SSB thread is up, please check your inbox for further details.

At 2/23/10 08:33 PM, Spindrift23 wrote: Whomever is challenging someone needs to state a topic.

I'm going to be honest here, this is a terrible idea. I could challenge someone with "vampire horror" or "fear of heights" or whatever on a topic I've already written about and just post an old story. There is so much room for manipulation, it's ridiculous.

Also, while I'm at it, I'd like to say your "no discussing shit in battle threads", or, what was it, only one post per person in each thread? That's stupid too. You're stifling what I percieve to be the whole purpose of these battles: To write in a closed environment whereby you know you'll recieve feedback on what works and what doesn't in your work, with comparison to another. How can we grow and learn and develop our writing skills if we're not allowed to talk about it? It seems like you just want people to win or lose and then move on with the show. This shouldn't be about that.

Sorry if I'm sounding harsh, but you seem to be trying to set up all these rules and constraints without putting in prior thought as to what you might be imposing with them.

At 2/23/10 07:39 PM, TheReno wrote: Si. I challenge him to write an Alternate History Action story. Just what it sounds like, an action story set in alternate universe where one of the huge events of our pasts had a diffrent outcome (Germany winning the war, Our economy failing instead of USSR, Romans staying a Republic with Caesar not being a dictator and them holding off the Huns etc.) Do you accept?

Well, threads already been made and all that so I don't suppose I have that much of a choice, but yeah I accept.

Although, I'm not too great with history so if it doesn't end up sounding realistic at all because the history is bad it isn't my fault. XD I don't intend to put alot of research into this, but I'll try and make it a good story.

But if everyone decides to ignore most innaccuracies in their vote then pretty much prepare to get raped bro.

I challenge Malicious Angel to a Short Story with the Topic of "Dreams". Do you accept?

But if everyone decides to ignore most innaccuracies in their vote then pretty much prepare to get raped bro.

You really dont need to have to accurate an history to do this. Like obviously the altered event needs to be accurate, like you cant change hitler commiting suicide to being by accident cause hes still dead. But what if he lived? And he had a war trial and got to make a speech (albiet that wasnt the intention) and inspired the third world war? You make a small change in famous shit and rewrite everything that happened after it if you want.

The reason behind the one post per thread was set because I did not want each thread turning into a spam fest. In the poetry battle threads, people were making posts about what the score was or just saying that it was going to be a hard decision. I did not want to let that happen here, so I tried to have everyone put everything possible into one thread. I guess instead of the one post per thread rule, I could change it to feeback & criticism posts only. Like I have said before, this whole concept has just started. I do not expect it to be perfect. I do not expect anyone to like it.

Thank you for voicing your opinion. In order forShort Story Battles to become "perfect" I'm going to need other people's help. I don't know what people would like to do and I don't know how they like to do it.

At 2/24/10 08:34 AM, Spindrift23 wrote: The reason behind the one post per thread was set because I did not want each thread turning into a spam fest. In the poetry battle threads, people were making posts about what the score was or just saying that it was going to be a hard decision. I did not want to let that happen here, so I tried to have everyone put everything possible into one thread. I guess instead of the one post per thread rule, I could change it to feeback & criticism posts only. Like I have said before, this whole concept has just started. I do not expect it to be perfect. I do not expect anyone to like it.

Thank you for voicing your opinion. In order forShort Story Battles to become "perfect" I'm going to need other people's help. I don't know what people would like to do and I don't know how they like to do it.

From what I noticed, people were posting the current tallies as part of their own votes, which doesn't really add unnecessary baggage to the thread. One thing I've enjoyed about those threads is the healthy discussion that's come from them. Instead of one critique per person for the short stories, I'd much prefer to see users engaging more critically with other users and the authors themselves. I don't know, "don't post spam" rules seem to me to be pointless to specific threads because it's a given on the forum that spam is not tolerable, and it falls under common sense.

Thanks for not taking my criticisms the wrong way, I know these things take time, I just think the forum hasn't yet gotten to a place where extra rules will be necessary, it's been noted in the lounge a few times that spammers haven't been much problem here yet.

As WritersBlock said, I think there are a few flaws in the whole ssb system here, and I'm not going to nit pick everything, but suggest ways to make it better- mostly. A few qualms have already been pointed out by WritersBlock, so some of these have already been touched on somewhat.

Going over the rules:

Topic:
Deadline for submission:
Voting begins:
Voting ends:

I think that the writer's themselves whould (for the most part) fill this out, within reason. I also feel there should be a section for 'specifics' if there are going to be any (For instance, I could say do a history story, but I could say it can't be on American / European history and throw a huge curve since most of the users here who come from one of those countries.)

On the qualm about the topics however, in that they're very open to manipulation, I believe that while honor will have to work with several of the ones that are currently open, some sort of rule should be set to put off the chance that one writer may put out something with much, much more than a week's worth of effort put into it or something they already know is pretty good.

The above times are Eastern Standard Time.

Voter Rules:
No person may post more than ONE time within an SSB thread. Please refrain from disucussing the ongoing battle, posting the current tally, or "root" for your favorite contestant. If you wish to discuss the SSB itself, please post within the Short Story Battles thread.

This is the big rule that should be changed. I do disagree with WB in that there is somewhat of a show to be had here and that it shouldn't all be about honing your skills; there should be some air of competition here to keep everyone sort of at their best.

I think there honestly shouldn't be 'rooting' because saying you're just going to go with your favorite writer before the other person posts feels kind of detrimental to the voting process. If everyone declares that WB is a better writer than VHSTapeClock before the stories are done (I know I pretty much did- sorry VHS) then it could influence people who are just passing through for a quick read.

But another quarrel is that if I post in an SSB thread then something I put a genuinely fair amount of effort into (It's hard to write a good amount in your free time, much less under a forced topic, lets be honest.) It might go largely ignored, other than a few responses that are somewhat forced and going through the motions. I would rather not post a story I worked kinda hard on if it's going to go pretty much unnappreciated aside from a few "its pretty good" comments.

When posting in a thread with the SSB: prefix, please include the following:
-->Which writer you are voting for
-->Why you have decided to vote for that writer
-->Give feedback/criticism to at least ONE of the writers

I believe that criticism shouldn't necessarily be mandated at this point and should be mostly optional, but that's my opinion- it wouldn't necessarily be detrimental to have this rule in place however, so I feel this rule should mostly be your call for now. I do however totally agree that you should give at the very least a justified reason for why you chose one over the other to prevent complete clutter of "spindrift23 1 ass-crumb 0" in threads without much reasoning. I wouldn't say be too strict with these rules though.

Basically I don't think these should be any different from regular threads and I think you are kind of jumping the gun in determining that we would make posts that detract from the thread. Even posts like "Man this is going to be a tough decision" or "I vote for X" atleast add something and isn't really spam, it's more of just a friendly decision.

-->Announce the current tally in the bottom of your post (ex. Spindrift23: 1 TrevorW: 3)

Mostly agree with this, but if you do rescend the rule of only one post I think it should be 'announce the current tally at the bottom of your post if you're voting" to seperate discussion from votes somewhat.

That said, I think there are a few more rules that could be put in place, but it's not necessarily about the responses but the stories:

1. stating a character limit should be fairly necessary; I would say only in broad terms though, ie "Short story" or "flash fiction". You could also just break it down like this:

Flash Fiction: 1-600 words
Short Story: 601-3000 words
Long Story / Novelette: 3000+ words

I would say that the target there would either be something around 600-3000 characters more often than not, but I think it should still be open to suggest that there not be a character limit at all.

2. I think there should be something in place to prevent someone from suggesting a topic by which they have something prewritten. This could be something like making both parties collaborate or just having a third party suggest it.

For instance saying "someone suggest a topic for PenisMcPerson V DrAverageDouche" or just leaving it unsaid and let whoever chances upon the challenge pick the topic would be a good course of action.

Another would be to let both parties come up with seperate terms; ie, someone suggests "action" and the other then throws on a more specific topic like "cop film homage" or "train robbery" or vice versa. It's still open for manipulation somewhat, but it's atleast a start.

A pool of ideas could also be used, whether it be sort of a lottery (Have say, a list of 25 or so topics at a time and have someone pick a number and use the assigned idea) or just listing a bunch of suggestions.

3. I think you should be more patient with making the topics. Both me and WritersBlock hadn't accepted by the time you made your threads, which caught me by surprise. I actually wouldn't have accepted if you hadn't made the thread, so I felt kind of obligated to do it.

The main thing about this is that this isn't the poetry battles; these are week long ordeals which take a fair amount of effort, and unlike the poetry battles which are only about a day long and could easily be written in the span of 20 minutes or so (Although it probably wouldn't win, you'd still earn some respect for participating) , these take much more of a time investment and as such should be a little more planned. I think basic cooperation from both parties shouldn't be too much to ask for.

Whew, feels like I went on kind of a diatribe here, but yeah basically these are just some suggestions to make this go down kind of smoother and be a bit less stifling as WB put it.

At 2/23/10 09:39 PM, TheSubject666 wrote: I challenge Malicious Angel to a Short Story with the Topic of "Dreams". Do you accept?

Yes I accept, Now may I ask how long the average short story is?

After taking what the two of you have said (WritersBlock & Ass-Crumb), I have decided that the most recent challenge will be the last Short Story Battle within my rules. During the time this battle is taking place, I will revise my rules for both the challenge process and the SSB threads. The things that the two of you have brought up make great sense to me and I see no other choice but to listen and take action.

So, one last battle and then maybe we can all have some fun. ;)

I'd like to throw my hat into the proverbial ring as well.

At 2/25/10 11:34 PM, Reptyle wrote: I'd like to throw my hat into the proverbial ring as well.

I'm willing to take you on. Just name a topic, and the guy can make a thread, If you want to go against me.

I'd like to have everyone hold off on challenging anyone until further notice. I am going to create a draft of the SSB rules and edit and revise until they are decent enough. Thanks for all if your past and future cooperation.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CHALLENGES STOP HERE <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

NO ONE IS TO POST CHALLENGE UNTIL SPINDRIFT GIVES THE OK

I just wanted to make this extremely apparent that no one should post another challenge. So yeah, No more CHALLENGES. So Don't Do IT!

At 2/25/10 11:45 PM, TheSubject666 wrote:
I'm willing to take you on. Just name a topic, and the guy can make a thread, If you want to go against me.

Very well then, I've seen a bit of your work and I think this could be quite interesting. As mentioned above, maybe a third party should choose a topic to prevent me from twisting the topic to my own evil, prewritten ends.

At 2/26/10 12:07 AM, Reptyle wrote:

At 2/25/10 11:45 PM, TheSubject666 wrote:
I'm willing to take you on. Just name a topic, and the guy can make a thread, If you want to go against me.

Very well then, I've seen a bit of your work and I think this could be quite interesting. As mentioned above, maybe a third party should choose a topic to prevent me from twisting the topic to my own evil, prewritten ends.

If someone else has to choose the topic, then I'm suggesting "Aesop's Fable", and I'm also going to add a qualifier that it must have a theme or moral, just because I want to see what you would do with it.

At 2/25/10 11:57 PM, Spindrift23 wrote: I'd like to have everyone hold off on challenging anyone until further notice. I am going to create a draft of the SSB rules and edit and revise until they are decent enough. Thanks for all if your past and future cooperation.

Sorry, forgot to check the thread for updates before I posted. Take as much time as you need to improve the competition structure.

It's no problem at all. I have a four day weekend right now so I would say by the time it is over I will have the first draft complete. That of course will not be the final draft. My guess as to when the battles will resume is by Friday of next week. If the rules are not ready by then, you can call me a big fat liar. :p

Im back alright! Even though i lost my last battle, i am not discouraged, i am ready to take on anybody anytime! But pleasem PLEASE, dont choose a subject as specific as my last battle( Cultural Rebellion in East Germany under cmmunism) seriousl6y, im 14, i have not a single clue shit of what it even mesnt.

I'll put my name in.

I have some bad news for the few people who are interested in the Short Story Battles. I am experiencing some technical difficulties, so I will not be able to put in as many Writing Forum hours as I would hope to. I am going to be taking the Short Story Battles into hiatus alongside me. There will be no more battles until I return. The battles that are taking place at this moment will be the final ones until I return.

Normally, a person might place someone else in charge of a competition. But I will not be doing so. If you guys could PLEASE not attempt to keep the Short Story Battles going while I am gone, I would appreciate it greatly. If it was later in the duration of the Short Story Battles, I would just pass moderation along to someone who has been participating in them for a while, but the Short Story Battles are young.

When I return, I will have a new set of rules for the Short Story Battles to follow. They will be similar, but different at the same time. Thanks to everyone who has shown interest and has participated in the Short Story Battles so far. I'll see you all when I come back and don't forget to KEEP WRITING!

At 3/1/10 05:07 PM, Spindrift23 wrote: If you guys could PLEASE not attempt to keep the Short Story Battles going while I am gone, I would appreciate it greatly.

Ugh, who died and made you king? Are you really listening to yourself here? These forums are for EVERYONE. Sure, these battles may not have gotten off to the best start, but you've got to stop trying to take complete ownership over them. The one-on-one format isn't just something that has to be done "officially" through you. It's just one way creative writing threads can be done. Stop these competitions for a while, whatever, I couldn't care less, but don't act like you have a say over what other people can do here. I'm sure there are plenty of other people here capable of making their own writing battles, and it's just rude of you to think you can stop them. Is it really important for you to control everything to do with these battles, is it really important that you have your name at the start of every thread? Think of what would happen if gumOnShoe took ownership of the monthly writing competitions. He's organised nearly all of them, he's put more into those competitions than you or me or anyone else here. If he had just shut the competitions down just because he wasn't going to be as active anymore it would be outrageous. As much as he has put into the competition, he doesn't own it, it's a community thing, it's something that's open to everybody. If you're telling me these short story battles are yours and yours alone to control, then frankly, I don't want to have anything to do with them any more. If you really wanted people to keep on writing, you should at least allow other people to pick up the battles, even if it's just a casual thing.

I don't mean to tell you what to do or how to act, but god fucking damnit your word is not the be all and end all. You don't own this forum or any part thereof, and neither do I, so just drop the authority act and start thinking about what will be best for the community as a whole.

At 3/1/10 05:07 PM, Spindrift23 wrote:

::

Normally, a person might place someone else in charge of a competition. But I will not be doing so. If you guys could PLEASE not attempt to keep the Short Story Battles going while I am gone, I would appreciate it greatly. If it was later in the duration of the Short Story Battles, I would just pass moderation along to someone who has been participating in them for a while, but the Short Story Battles are young.

You can just cede authority over to me, and I'll promise reliquish it back to you once you return. This is much more efficent, and it'll be better for the forum as a whole.